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 Leader referred to agenda item 1, as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting and Members noted  this information.

There were no apologies for absence received.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of Urgent Business. (Late items of Urgent Business will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items of Urgent Business will be dealt with under Item 21 below. New items of exempt business will be dealt with at Item 25 below).

There were no items of urgent business to consider.

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.

There were no declarations of interest put forward.

On occasions part of the Cabinet meeting will be held in private and will not be open to the public if an item is being considered that is likely to lead to the disclosure of exempt or confidential information. In accordance with the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 (the “Regulations”), members of the public can make representations about why that part of the meeting should be open to the public.

On occasions part of the Cabinet meeting will be held in private and will not be open to the public if an item is being considered that is likely to lead to the disclosure of exempt or confidential information. In accordance with the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 (the “Regulations”), members of the public can make representations about why that part of the meeting should be open to the public.

This agenda contains exempt items as set out at Item 23 &24 : Exclusion of the Press and Public.  One representation has been received from a member of the public, objecting to any part of the meeting being held in private on the basis that council-tax payers should have full access to all aspects of the preferred bidder for the proposed Haringey Development Vehicle (item 23]).

On considering this objection, the Cabinet should be satisfied that the material remains exempt from publication, for the reasons given below and in accordance with Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the exempt information.

This is the formal 5 clear day notice under the Regulations to confirm that it is the intention that this Cabinet meeting will be partly held in private for the reasons set out in this Agenda including Agenda Item 23 which we have received representations on and which contains exempt information under paragraphs 3 and 5 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

The Cabinet had received one representation from a member of the public, objecting to any part of the meeting being held in private on the basis that Council-tax payers should have full access to all aspects of the preferred bidder for the proposed Haringey Development Vehicle (item 23).

Cabinet noted that the material in item 23 contained information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) and also that it contains information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the exempt information.

On considering this objection, the Cabinet agreed that the exempt information in item 23 complied with paragraph, 3 and 5 , Part 1, schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as outlined by the clerk, and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the exempt information.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting held on the 24^th of  January 2017 as a correct record.

The minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on the 24^th January 2017 were agreed as an accurate record of the meeting.

The Leader agreed to ensure that Councillor Newton was provided with the cost of staff redundancies as a result of the closure of current Council provision at Wolves Lane Centre and transfer of site to OrganicLea.

Cabinet to consider the Scrutiny Review and Recommendations  of the Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel on the  Governance Arrangements for the Haringey Development Vehicle Report. The Cabinet Member for   Housing, Regeneration and Planning  to provide Cabinet’s response to the recommendations.

The Leader advised the meeting, that given the connection between agenda items 8 and 10 and the deputation received in relation to item 10; it was appropriate to vary the agenda to consider the deputation first and proceed to consider items 8 and 10 thereafter. The Cabinet had also received a deputation from the Friends of Reading and Education group in relation to the Medium Term Financial Strategy report at item 11 and would consider this deputation before considering item 11, but after considering the open sections of the Haringey Development Vehicle report.

The Leader advised members of the public, who had not attended a Cabinet meeting before, that the open part of the report on approval of a preferred bidder for the Haringey Development Vehicle would be considered at item 10, with questions taken on the open part of the report.

Cabinet would then continue to consider the remaining reports on the agenda, as the usual procedure followed at Cabinet meetings, before proceeding into the private session at item 22, to consider the exempt information on approval of a preferred bidder for the Haringey Development Vehicle and also the insurance arrangements for Leasehold Right to Buy properties in order to consider the recommendations of these reports. The decisions from the meeting will be published on the Council website as usual.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Standing Orders.

Deputation 1 - Item 10 – Appointment of a preferred bidder for the Haringey Development Vehicle.

The Leader invited Paul Burnham, representing Defend Council Housing, to put forward his deputation to Cabinet. The representations were concerning the decision at item 10, appointment of a preferred bidder for the Haringey Development Vehicle.

Mr Burnham began his deputation by asking Cabinet to not set aside the Scrutiny Panel  review and recommendations and to not appoint a preferred bidder for the Haringey Development Vehicle. The deputation party  felt that this was a privatisation scheme and highlighted the following concerns:

• No adequate risk assessment had been made available to provide residents with any assurances about this joint venture scheme
• Potential Council loss of control over the company
• The lack of guarantees for the local authority in this type of arrangement
• The potential to demolish Council and Housing Association  homes and replace them with profitable housing
• The lack of guarantees for council  tenants and the terms and conditions that they can return to their homes on
• Apparent democratic deficit with no consultation with residents and no potential decision at full Council
• Some residents did not want re – development of their estates and wanted  retention of good council  housing
• Questioned the appropriateness of the preferred bidder and their effects on the social environment

The Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration and Planning responded to the deputation‘s concerns and highlighted the significant work undertaken by procurement, legal and finance professionals to assess the risk in taking forward this joint venture scheme. The Cabinet Member stressed, that it was not the case that the Council’s land would automatically be passed over to the developer on the first day of the partnership. Decision making on land transfer would be on a phase by phase basis with these decisions taken by the Cabinet. The Cabinet Member provided assurance that there had been significant discussion on this issue.

The Cabinet Member emphasised, that it was not the case that Council homes would be demolished by the vehicle and replaced with profitable homes. The Council did not have the capacity and expertise to deliver the regeneration plans on its own and were seeking a partner to deliver the much needed homes and regeneration for the borough. Any future decisions on demolition would be consulted upon and made by the Council.

The Cabinet Member advised, the Haringey Development Vehicle would provide clear guarantees for tenants, more affordable housing and there was no race for profit being pursued by this model.

In relation to the concerns raised on the democratic deficit, there had been significant consultation and this was still ongoing in Northumberland Park and on Broadwater Farm. This consultation had included the site allocations Development Plan Documents, the Tottenham Area Action Plan and in relation to Northumberland Park, the development plans had been agreed with residents.

The Cabinet Member advised that the referenced practices of the subsidiary company had already ceased when the preferred bidder had took control. The preferred bidder had a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 182.

To note the Scrutiny Review recommendations and agree the Cabinet response to the  recommendations set out in appendix 2.

The Chair of the Housing and Regeneration Scrutiny Panel, introduced the review of the Haringey Development Vehicle governance arrangements by setting out the context, origins and scope of the review which had been tasked with adding value to the organisation by providing recommendations on the Haringey Development Vehicle governance arrangement.

During the process, the Scrutiny Panel had felt that they could not make recommendations about the governance structure of the proposal without addressing the overarching question marks which were coming forward on the risks of embarking on the development vehicle scheme which was of a significant scale with uncertainties around the financial arrangements.

The Panel felt that to ignore the potential risks of a scheme that the governance arrangements were intended to mitigate, felt eventually to be counter intuitive.

This was particularly pertinent for a Panel whose role was primarily to carry out oversight and to present critical thorough constructive challenge to decision makers.

The Panel felt that tight governance could mitigate against risks for the public sector, however in a partnership which was equal, such as the Haringey Development Vehicle, there were concerns about how to enforce these, simply because the Council would be in a position of negotiation rather than having an ultimate decision making role.

The overarching questions that remained did not deter the panel making recommendations on the governance of the Haringey Development Vehicle.

The Panel Chair strongly believed that the critique of the proposed Haringey Development Vehicle rests largely on risk and mitigation, and it would have been irresponsible of the Panel not to recommend protections, if the proposal went ahead.

The Panel would be continuing their work on the Haringey Development Vehicle, and had agreed the parameters both at the Panel meeting and the main Overview and Scrutiny meeting.

The Panel Chair felt that that many of the answers to the questions posed to officers and other authorities came back with answers that simply left the Council with more and new questions.

Questions had arisen around certainties, guarantees and commitments that the Council could deliver at this stage. Ultimately the Panel felt that what it needed to always consider the Council’s primary function and aim and purpose as a local authority. This was mainly about providing certainty and security to vulnerable families who had faced years of temporary accommodation and uncertainty.

The Panel and the main Scrutiny Committee were unanimous in its view that the prudent course of action was for the Haringey Development Vehicle process to be stopped allowing for further necessary scrutiny.

Councillor Strickland thanked the Scrutiny Panel for their work on Haringey Development Vehicle, governance process and addressed the issue of enforcement of the Haringey Development Vehicle objectives which was a cultural question and further provided assurance, that although this was an equal joint partnership, decisions by the Haringey Development Vehicle board would only be taken forward if reached by a consensus. The Council would have a powerful blocking vote if proposals were not acceptable to them.

The Cabinet were accepting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 183.

[Report of the  Director for Planning, Regeneration and Development. To be introduced by the Cabinet member for  Housing , Regeneration and Planning.] Following Cabinet's approval in November 2015 to proceed with an OJEU competitive dialogue process (which commenced in January 2016), to approve the recommendation for a preferred bidder with whom the Council will form the Haringey Development Vehicle as a joint venture, subject to further negotiation and a final decision to create the HDV later in 2017.

The Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration and Planning introduced the report which set out the outcome of the Competitive Dialogue procurement process under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 to procure an investment and development partner with which to establish the Haringey Development Vehicle (‘HDV).

The Cabinet Member provided some context to this procurement decision which was the desperate need for housing both locally and nationally. He further highlighted the strategic analysis demonstrating the need for different types of housing to deal with the housing crisis. The Cabinet was committed to not managing decline and was not simply going to accept the effects of the housing crisis but wanted to build new homes and also improve existing Council housing together with providing good employment opportunities for residents.

 It was also important to consider the financial ability of the Council to build the large number of homes needed given the government had withdrawn £160 million from the Council and restricted how the Council spends housing money. It was evident, when considering all other London boroughs positions, that there was not any money for Councils to build a significant number of homes without support.

Members and officers had worked hard, through the Future Housing Review to bring forward options, for increasing housing in the borough. This group had considered a range or working models to increase the availability of housing such as wholly owned Council companies which were actually building fewer homes. They also considered other standard models but as the Council owned land on the housing sites, the Haringey Development Vehicle option offered the better option for the development .This model also ensured the Council could have a share of the profits and be able to reinvest this in community facilities and existing housing whilst maintaining control over the development.

Cabinet’s consideration of the Haringey Development Vehicle had started in February 2015 and the procurement process instigated by Cabinet in November 2015. The Cabinet Member felt that this had been a good thorough process, resulting in a strong preferred bidder coming forward.

If the bidder was approved, there would follow a five month process to finalise the final agreement on the terms of the  Haringey Development Vehicle. The Cabinet Member reiterated that he would be working hard to get a good deal for residents during this 5 month period.

The Leader invited questions from Members and the following issues were raised:

• Assurance that Council rented homes would not decrease in favour of shared ownership properties,
• Would the construction exclusivity agreement with Lendlease incentivise them to act in a beneficial manner with Council?
• Charge from Lendlease for their expertise?
• Halting the procurement process.
• Independent tenants and leaseholders survey which indicates that that there is little knowledge of the Haringey Development Vehicle
• Providing tenants in the housing estates, potentially affected by demolition and decanting, with new homes on the new estate and with a secure tenancy at target rent.
• Whether it was made clear to Lendlease, during the procurement process, that they will  ...  view the full minutes text for item 184.

[Report of the  Chief Operating Officer.  To be introduced by the Cabinet member for Finance and Health.  Following public consultation and Scrutiny review , to consider the final budget package for 2017/18 and later years, proposed council tax for 2017/18 and approval of HRA rents. The  strategy  will then go forward to Full Council on the 27^th of February  for adoption.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Health introduced the report which set out the current Council financial position. The report finalised the Council’s General Fund Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) for the period 2017/18 to 2021/22 and proposed approval of the constituent elements of the strategy to Council on 27^th February 2017 together with the Council’s revenue and capital budgets for 2017/18.

The Cabinet Member spoke of the rapid increases in demand for Children services, Adults Social Care and Temporary Accommodation combined with significant difference in funding for the Council and wider financial strains in the public sector. Despite this, £50m of savings had been made but there was a gap of £45m, over the next 5 years, so the challenge faced was stark.

It was noted that the Adults Social Care Precept, at the time consultation of the budget was taken forward in December, was proposed at 2% for each proceeding three financial years. However, the Council could now levy 3 % in each of the next two financial years, a total of 6% over three financial years. Therefore, the report was recommending a 3% pre-cept in 2017/18/19 whilst continuing to freeze Council tax base rate. This was important as the Council were expecting growth in GLA precept rate of 1.5 %.

In relation to the risks in the MTFS savings proposed that were marked red or amber, these were around 65% of the savings and it was important to be clear that the Council would be consistently monitoring these savings and working with partners and residents to meet these savings requirements which would mean changing the way the Council works, whilst also delivering on the agreed Corporate Plan.

The Cabinet Member thanked participants in the consultation and thanked the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for their recommendations. There were two key changes recommended that were accepted. These were the removal of the proposal for Library reduced hours and target operating model for parking. The Council would revisit how the Parking service works and re-asses best value for money in relation to this service.

Councillor Connor, Vice Chair of Overview and Scrutiny, introduced the Scrutiny recommendations on the budget which were a result of individual panel work which was collated and discussed at the main Committee meeting. Cllr Connor drew attention to the financial risk outlined in the report and requested that Scrutiny receive, as part of their usual information about the budget, more details on the risk assessment of the savings proposals and mitigations.

Councillor Connor was pleased that the Libraries proposal had been withdrawn and mentioned the disability expenditure proposal. There had been debate at Scrutiny on the individual assessment tasks, involved in making this saving, and whether this would reduce the savings. Therefore, a request was made not to proceed with this saving and that further consideration be given to the financial cost around doing this.

In relation to the Daycare Opportunities proposal, which had been deferred for a further financial year , it was hoped  ...  view the full minutes text for item 185.

[Report of the Chief Operating Officer. To be introduced by the Cabinet  Member for Finance and Health. The Council’s income policy  requires an annual review of the level of the fees and charges  levied on service users . This report considers the relevant factors  affecting the review of fees and charges , identifies those services  where an increase  is being proposed and seeks approval to increase the fee or charge rate to those services where an increase is proposed  in line with inflations. Members agreement will be sought where an alternative approach is proposed.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Health introduced the report which set out the fees and charges that were proposed to be applied to services for the year 2017/18. This report considered the relevant factors affecting the review of fees and charges identified those services where an increase was being proposed and sought approval to increase the fee or charge rate to those services where an increase is proposed in line with inflation. The report sought Member’s agreement where an alternative approach is being proposed.

Further to considering the report and appendices as well as Equalities Impact Assessments, Cabinet -

RESOLVED

1. To agree the proposed fees and charges to be levied by the Council with effect from 1 April 2017 (unless otherwise stated) including new fees and charges for street naming and numbering, some services within Registrars and Waste and Parks Services as detailed in the appendices;
2. To agree the revised fees and charges for Adults’ Services as set out in Appendix I with effect from 1 April 2017;
3. To agree the revised fees and charges for Traffic Management Services as set out in Appendix II with effect from 1 April 2017;
4. To agree the fees and charges for Libraries Services as set out in Appendix IIIa with effect from 1 April 2017;
5. To agree the revised fees and charges for Cultural Services as set out in Appendix IIIb with effect from 1 April 2017;
6. To agree the revised fees and charges for Garage Rents as set out in Appendix IV with effect from 1 April 2017;
7. To agree the revised fees and charges for Asset Management Services as set out in Appendix V with effect from 1 April 2017;
8. To agree the revised fees and charges for Court Summons as set out in Appendix VI with effect from 1 April 2017;
9. To agree the revised fees and charges for Adult Learning (HALS) as set out in Appendix VII with effect from 1 April 2017;
10. To agree the revised fees and charges for Waste Collection Services (Neighbourhood Action) as set out in Appendix VIII with effect from 1 April 2017;
11. To agree the revised fees and charges for Parks Services as set out in Appendix IXa with effect from 1 April 2017;
12. To agree the revised fees and charges for Parks Events Services as set out in Appendix IXb with effect from 1 April 2017;
13. To agree the revised fees and charges for Registrars as set out in Appendix X with effect from 1 April 2017;
14. To agree the revised fees and charges for Regulatory Services (excluding Licenses) as set out in Appendix XI with effect from 1 April 2017;
15. To agree the revised fees and charges for Building Control Services as set out in Appendix XII with effect from 1 April 2017;
16. To agree the fees and charges for Children’s Services as set out in Appendix XIII with effect from 1 April 2017;
17. To note where specific changes in fees and charges form part of savings proposals in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 186.

[Report of the Assistant Director for Commissioning. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Children and Families]The report sets out the implications for Haringey of the implementation of the National Early Years Funding Formula for Haringey from April 2017.

The Cabinet Member for Children and Families introduced the report which set out proposals for a new early years funding formula in Haringey which would ensure that the Council continues to meet its statutory responsibilities in relation to funding the free entitlement for 2, 3 and 4 year olds. The proposals also sought to ensure that the Council were able to implement changes in a fair and transparent way, acknowledging that work would need to continue to manage the impact of the changes on the local childcare market.

The Cabinet Member thanked officers in Commissioning and early years for their hard work in taking forward the consultation on the national funding formula for early years in tight timescales which had been extremely challenging.

RESOLVED

1. To note the outcome of the consultations undertaken with providers of early education and childcare in Haringey, and with the Schools Forum, as set out in the appendices to this report.

2. To agree the introduction of a revised early years funding formula for Haringey from April 2017 which includes:

-          A universal base rate for 3 and 4 year olds in Haringey set at £4.88 per hour, per child

-          Mandatory deprivation supplement funding of £0.30 per hour, per child, derived from the £0.52 per hour per child available for supplements

-          A supplement for quality with an annual budget of £76,000 to facilitate system leadership for providers requiring support

3. To agree that there will be no supplements set for Rurality / Sparsity, Flexibility or English as an Additional Language.

4. To agree to reduce from April 2019 the current local authority funding rate of £6 per hour for providers of the 2 year old free entitlement, to the funding rate (£5.66 per hour) received by the local authority from the DfE.

5. To agree that £0.7m of Dedicated Schools Grant be set aside as transitional funding to subside childcare for the period from April to August 2017 prior to the introduction of new fees and the 30 hours funded entitlement for 3 and 4 year olds.

6. To agree to remove the Council’s involvement in setting the fees for school-based early years provision, allowing the four maintained school-run settings to set their own fees.

7. To agree to replace the current single fee structure, applied across all four Council-run childcare settings with a new structure where fees differ from setting to setting.

8. To agree to the further exploration of a refreshed, financially viable childcare offer to be in place at the Park Lane setting from as early as September 2017.

9. To agree to increase fees for the four Council–run childcare settings from current levels in order to generate the levels of income required to mitigate the loss of subsidy funding. This change to fees would be implemented from September 2017 and kept under review due to the risk of a negative impact on service take-up and therefore, fee income generation.

10. To agree that, where there may be early years funding remaining, once the early years funding formula  ...  view the full minutes text for item 187.

[Report of the Chief Operating Officer. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Health.] Quarterly monitoring report on forecast  of spend against budget and consideration of any proposed budget virements.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Health introduced the report which provided an update on the projected financial position of the Council for 2016/17 as at Period 9 (December 2016). It covered significant operating and capital revenue variances on a full-year basis.

At the end of Quarter 3 and Period 9 overall the Council was projecting a full-year deficit/overspend of £21.3m for 2016/17. This was a small improvement of £0.7m from the Quarter 2 position of £22.0m reported to Cabinet in October 2016. The Council were still grappling with demand pressures in Adults services, Children’s services and in Temporary Accommodation. There was also some further work being completed on improving forecasting for year end.

The Chief Operating Officer was asked to outline the Council’s position on reserves, assuming the overspend does not fall significantly by the end of the financial year.

The Cabinet noted that there were two specific categories for reserves, those which were earmarked for specific Council projects and non ear marked reserves for use when unexpectedly needed and looked at for assessing the Council’s sustainability. In order to manage and mitigate the overspend, further to checking what the earmarked reserves were allocated for, the Chief Operating Officer had consolidated the earmarked reserves to provide some scope to cover the overspend by the end of the financial year.

RESOLVED

1.    To note the report and the Council’s 2016/17 Period 9 financial position in respect of revenue and capital expenditure;

2.    To note the risks and mitigating actions, including spend controls identified in this report in the context of the Council’s on-going budget management responsibilities;

3.    To approve the creation of a contingency budget within the capital programme funded from any net corporate scheme budgets no longer required to fund new schemes (subject to approved business case).

4.    To approve the required virements over £0.25m as set out in section 7 of this report.

Reasons for decision

A strong financial management framework, including oversight by Members and senior management, is an essential part of delivering the Council’s priorities and statutory duties.

Alternative options considered

This is the 2016/17 Quarter 3 Financial Report. As such, there are no alternative options.

[Report of the Director for Public Health. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Health.]Award of contract for prevention services delivered through the GP practices.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Health introduced the report which sought agreement to establish a Framework for the provision of enhanced services (the “Framework”) and to award contracts to designated General Practices (GPs) for one or all of the following; health checks: stop smoking service, long acting reversible contraception (LARC) and shared care/opiate substitute prescribing (OSP), GP with special interest for substance misuse (GPSI), GP lead sexual health, GP lead making every contact count (MECC).

RESOLVED

1.    That Cabinet agrees to establish the Framework and to award contracts as described in 1.1 above to GPs in accordance with Contract Standing Orders (CSO) 9.07.1(d).

2. That the contracts will be awarded under the Framework for a period of 4 years to the GPs listed in the table in paragraph 6.19.6 of the report.

Reasons for decision

The Council has a statutory responsibility to deliver health checks and sexual and reproductive health services. These and the other services are essential elements in meeting the Council’s health improvement targets.

Alternative options considered

                 The public health team considered providing these services just through existing providers. However there is evidence regarding the advantage of using GPs: National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) evidence suggests that GPs are positioned to use routine appointments to deliver brief interventions around quitting and practice nurses to providing rapid access to a service. ^[1] NICE recommends using GPs to deliver OSP service as a way of de stigmatising this service.^[2] For LARC the Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Health recommends increasing the uptake of LARC and use of GPs to achieve this. ^[3]

It is also more cost effective to use GPs to provide these services i.e. cost per patient per year in a specialist drug service is £1825 compared to £1199 in primary care, LARC in clinic costs £150 and in a GP it costs £82.

[Report of the Assistant Director for Planning. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration and Planning.]The Council is required to have an up to date Statement of Community Involvement. Since the last update in 2011, there have been a number of legislative changes to the planning system which set out new requirements for local councils. This has in turn required the update of Haringey's SCI. The report sets out the changes to the document and summarises the consultation responses to the 2015 consultation.

The Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration and Planning introduced the report which sought agreement to the statement of community involvement which was initially adopted in 2008, updated with minor amendments in 2011 and now required a further update to take account of changes in planning legislation and to reflect current practices in community engagement, including greater use of electronic communications such as email and social media.

RESOLVED

1.    To note the outcomes of the consultation of the updated SCI, carried out in 2015;

2.    To approve the changes made to the document as a result of the consultation, as well as the factual and legislative changes; and

3.    To approve the updated SCI for adoption.

Reason for decision

All local planning authorities are required under section 18(1) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 to prepare and adopt a Statement of Community Involvement (SCI).

Approval of the SCI will ensure that the Council meets its statutory obligations for engaging with the community and statutory stakeholders in plan making and determining planning applications.

Alternative options considered

The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 ("the 2004 Act") requires local planning authorities to prepare and adopt a Statement of Community Involvement. As such the option to do nothing is discounted

[Report of the Director for Planning, Regeneration and Development. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration and Planning.] This will be an update from previous Cabinet Report on changed boundaries of sites within the demise of the Strategic Development Partnership.

The Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration and Planning introduced the report which outlined that the development proposed by Argent Related of its scheme, agreed by Cabinet in July 2016, had reached a more advanced design stage and now required a slight variation to the site boundary of Plot 6. There would be no net change to total site area of Plot 6, as compared to that which was reported to Cabinet in July 2016. The land consisting of Plot 6 which was now required to be declared surplus to requirements and be disposed of to Argent Related is shown edged on the plan attached in Appendix D.

RESOLVED

Monument Way

1. To acquire the land (shown shaded orange on the plan in attached Appendix B) from TfL for no consideration for general fund purposes and that this land be included in the land to be disposed of to Newlon Housing Trust as agreed by Cabinet on 15 March 2016.

2. To declare the additional housing land at the Monument Way site (shown hatched black within the revised site plan in attached Appendix B) surplus to requirements and that this land be included in the land to be disposed of to Newlon Housing Trust as agreed at Cabinet on 15^th March 2016.

Plot 6– Tottenham Hale Strategic Development Partnership

3.    To declare the revised Plot 6 site at Tottenham Hale (shown edged red on the site plan attached as Appendix D) surplus to requirements and to incorporate the revised Plot 6 land as part of the 10 sites to be disposed of to Argent Related, as agreed by Cabinet on 12 July 2016.

Reasons for decision

Cabinet has already decided on 15 March 2016 to dispose of the adjoining site at Monument Way and on 12 July 2016 Cabinet agreed to dispose of the original Plot 6 at Tottenham Hale. Both pieces of land lie within the Tottenham Hale District Centre which is the first phase of the Tottenham Housing Zone and will be key to achieving long term sustainable regeneration in the area.

Monument Way

As Newlon Housing Trust have progressed designs for this site it has become clear that slightly more land is needed in order to achieve planning permission and deliver a viable scheme. The land required is shown hatched black in Appendix B and is held for housing purposes is a grass verge.

The Council are not in a position to undertake the development at Monument Way themselves due to insufficient resources and have been discussing with Newlon Housing Trust, as a preferred partner, the opportunity to take forward the development. The Council has recently acquired land from the adjoining school and is in process of finalising this acquisition with Transport for London in order to own the total site unencumbered.

Plot 6

Plot 6 at Tottenham Hale is within the Strategic Development Partnership Area, which aims to provide new mixed-use development at the heart of the District Centre.

As Argent Related have progressed designs for this site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 191.

[Report of the Assistant Director for Corporate Governance. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Corporate Resources.]To seek approval to award the contract for Buildings Insurance for Leasehold (RTB) properties to successful tenderer.

The Cabinet Member for Corporate Resources introduced the report which informed the Cabinet of the procurement process undertaken to appoint a provider for the Leaseholders’ Property Insurance Service from 1 April 2017 for 3 years with an option to extend for a further 2 years.

RESOLVED

That in accordance with Contract Standing Order 9.07.1(d) the Cabinet approves the award of the contract for the provision of the Leaseholder Property Insurance Service from 1 April 2017 for a maximum term of 5 years, on a 3 + 2 year basis, to Ocaso S.A. UK Branch.

Reasons for decision

The current insurance contract commenced on 1 April 2014 and was based on a 3 year agreement, with an option to extend by a further 2 years. Due to the substantially deteriorating claims experience over the existing contract period, the current insurers declined to extend the current contract at existing premium rates. It is necessary to ensure that the new contract is in place from 1 April 2017, to avoid any gap in insurance cover for the Council and leaseholders.

Alternative options considered

Haringey, along with eight other London boroughs (Croydon, Camden, Harrow, Islington, Kingston-upon-Thames, Lambeth, Sutton and Tower Hamlets) work as a formal consortium, Insurance London Consortium (ILC), to share best practice in Risk Management and to procure insurance services. In the case of the Leaseholder insurance contracts, these were tendered via the ILC and awarded on 1 April 2014; Haringey were the only authority placed with the current provider, based on price and quality considerations, and the ILC will only re-tender its leaseholder contracts in two years time. It was therefore necessary to undertake a stand alone tender process, outside the ILC, which was managed in-house via the Council’s online tender portal, with support from the ILC external insurance advisors.

There is no framework available to use for leaseholder insurance provision. Procurement of stand alone cover for leaseholder insurance, via an OJEU tender, is therefore the only remaining option available to the Council.

To note the minutes of the following:

Cabinet Member signing on the 23^rd of January 2017

Cabinet  Member signing on the 24^th of January 2017

RESOLVED

To note the minutes of the following:

Cabinet Member signing on the 23^rd of January 2017

Cabinet  Member signing on the 24^th of January 2017

To note the significant and delegated actions taken by Directors in January.

RESOLVED

To note the decisions taken by directors in January.

To consider any items admitted at Item 3 above.

None

Note from the Democratic Services &Scrutiny Manager

Items 23, 24 and 25  allow for the consideration of exempt information in relation to items 10, 18 and 3 respectively.

RESOLVED:

That the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting as the items below contain exempt information, as defined under paragraph, 3  and 5 , Part 1, schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

RESOLVED

That the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting as the items below contain exempt information, as defined under paragraph, 3  and 5 , Part 1, schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

As per item 10.

As per 184.

As per item 18.

As per item 192.

 To agree the exempt Cabinet minutes from the meting held on the 24^th January 2017.

RESOLVED

To agree the  exempt Cabinet minutes  of the meeting held on the 24^th January 2017.

None