To consider any requests received in accordance with Standing Orders.
Minutes:
The Leader was handed a petition in relation to the proposed closure of the Haven day-care centre. In accordance with committee standing order 31.1 this was recorded as received and a response due at the next ordinary meeting of the Cabinet in March.
There had been a total of seven deputations received, six in relation to agenda item 7[Corporate Planning 2015-18] and one in relation to agenda item 11[423 West Green Road, Red House].
Unison – Deputation 1
The Leader invited UNISON spokesperson Chris Taylor to address the Cabinet.
Chris Taylor put forward his deputation on behalf of the joint trade unions and set out the reasons for Cabinet not taking forward the proposed budget reductions contained in the Corporate Planning report. He asked the Cabinet to consider the impact of the budget reductions on vulnerable adults, on day care centres, support to families, young people and stressed that the savings would impact most on the vulnerable and marginalised.
The Unions asked how communities could recover from these reductions with decreased numbers of council staff providing local services. The Unions felt that there was an alternative; the council could set a one year budget and give regard to a potential change in government which may provide a change in budget allocations to local authorities. Alternatives put forward, were cutting spend on consultants, making further use of the council’s reserves and discontinuing partnership working with private organisations.
Councillor Kober, the Leader of the Council, responded to the issues raised and made clear that no one in the council wanted to be in this position of needing to make £70m budget savings. It was important to keep in mind that the council had already made £117m in cuts over the last 4 years through making efficiencies and protecting Frontline services but options were limited now in how the £70m budget savings could be achieved. It was important to remember that the coalition government had promised to complete the budget reductions in 4 years but this had not happened and local government was continuing to face the brunt of decreased funding.
In response to the option of setting a one year budget as opposed to a three year budget, there were no signs that the government funding situation would change in the next year. All the major parties were signed up to continuing to reduce the budget deficit .Labour had indicated that they would change the funding formulae for the New Homes Bonus and this had been analysed as benefiting Northern metropolitan towns and reducing funding for London boroughs.
It was important to have a clear and open three year budget for consultation and engagement with staff, residents and partners instead of one year budget where the council would be forced to salami slice services year on year.
In response to avoiding the budget reductions, the council could not set an illegal budget as there was provision in the law for the section 151 officer to step in and compile a budget on behalf of the council and this would mean not having any say in the budget choices made which would be to the detriment of all residents.
Deputation 2 - Opposition to closure of day care centres
The Leader invited the second deputation spokesperson Marianne Swannell, vice president of the National Autistic Society, to address the Cabinet. Marianne Swannell, spoke against the proposed cuts in day care centres providing support for people with severe learning difficulties and spoke about the specialist work of the Roundways Project which provided well trained staff with significant expertise in working with Autism clients. She underlined that the gathered expertise of the staff, made this service a success. Marianne Swannell described her own personal family story of how lack of early and continuing expert support for autism can lead to devastating crisis points and actually cost the state more through required hospital treatment. She opposed the proposition of supported living arrangements for young people with disabilities and felt that, although there were some young people that could be supported to live independently, there were others with complex needs that could not be supported to live independently. Marianne Swannell reiterated the Roundways project should not close and Cabinet were asked to reject these proposals.
The Leader asked Cabinet Members to put forward their questions to the deputation party.
Understanding was sought on what, in particular, the deputation party felt was of value and the difference made by the Roundways centre. In response it was noted that the expertise and support provided by the staff made a difference to the clients. The centre had well trained established staff which was imperative for helping with complex, lifelong disabilities such as Autism. At the Roundways Project clients had personalised plans with a rota in place to help manage more complex clients and because staff were established they had the confidence of clients which was also important aspect of support for this social and communicative disorder.
The Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing thanked the deputation party for coming to the meeting and he appreciated the time made by carers to attend meetings of the council. Councillor Morton explained that the budget process was challenging but it was important to be clear on the process. He recognised that people will have different needs and acknowledged that some people with disabilities can live supported in the community and others cannot. In looking at the budget there was a need to deliver as many Adult services in a sustainable way as possible. He had visited the Roundways and 4 day care centres and met with residential providers .He had listened to the views in the consultation and subsequently Cabinet had withdrawn the £5.7m in proposed savings relating to Adult services care packages. The model of adult and social care integration was integral part of how the services went forward and the council would be looking to work with Adult Service users to find out what works well for them in the services being provided and how the transition period can be as comfortable as possible. There were difficult decisions to make on the provision of day care centres but the council was pursuing the need to provide fair and sustainable services.
Deputation 3 – Opposition to the closure of the Haven
Heather Martin - co-ordinator, relatives support group at the Haynes Day Centre and representatives for carers at the Grange and Haven came forward with the third deputation. Heather Martin put forward the importance of day care centres for dementia suffers and was concerned about the proposed pooling of dementia services and re- provision at the Grange and Haynes centre. Heather Martin felt that there was a lack of understanding about the care provided by the day care centres and the important part they played in keeping dementia suffers as mobile and less isolated as possible. The centres have good client /worker ratios, prevent social isolation, and have experienced dedicated staff .With the increase in dementia sufferers and with more responsibility falling on families, day care centres are a vital source for the community.
Heather Martin further referred to the initial consultation undertaken on pooling demand for dementia services and the re-provision of services which was yet to be fully set out. The deputation urged the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing to take no pooling action and test this initiative with dementia users.
In response to a Cabinet Member question, the deputation party felt that the Adult home care package was a supplement and could not replace the specialist help provided by a day-care centre.
The Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing responded to the deputation and explained that the council considered intervention and their statutory responsibilities at the heart of their budget plans. It was important for carers to also receive support and the local authorities would be looking into the areas that might need support, and use of respite provision. After the pre budget consultation there would still be an opportunity to feed into the budget process and the council would be looking at all the options available and looking at what is required for dementia suffers , completing a full equalities impact assessment, where required, and working out how best to work with the expertise required.
Deputation 4 – opposition to the reductions in the Children’s disabilities budget
Ibrahim and Zac of the Mpower young participation group came forward as the 4th deputation to talk on behalf of disabled young people using the Markfield centre.
The project they attended had been running for over 10 years and was based at the Markfield Centre and helping young people with both physical and behavioural disabilities .Zac had wanted to address the Cabinet as he was worried about the local services for disabled young people being cut. He felt that the £1.5m proposed saving in Children’s Services budget was too much.
Zac highlighted some of the most important things that the funding for the centres is spent on such as short breaks, respite care, after school clubs for young disabled people and short holidays.
Zac spoke about the importance of helping young people earlier with their physical and behavioural disabilities as these stops their problems getting worse.
Ibrahim spoke about the help with independence that the Markfield project provides such as support in getting to places. Also when young people know the staff well they can feel safe and cared for. Ibrahim advised that there is good support from workers at Markfield that help the young people feel safe and enable the young people to make friends and feel independent of carers. Ibrahim had seen a lot of after school clubs and activities cut and did not want the Markfield project to be cut as the project makes young people feel valued, want to do more and achieve things.
The Cabinet Member for Children and Families thanked Zac and Ibrahim for coming to the meeting and was impressed with the effort put into the presentation. Cllr Waters reiterated that the Cabinet does value children with disabilities and do understand the need to provide a sensitive and safe environment for disabled young people / children and also the need to provide respite care for parents and carers. The spend in the Children’s Service had not been finalised as yet and the Cabinet Member for Children and Families would visit the Markfield project.
Deputation 5 – Opposition to reduction of 8 Children’s Centres
The Children’s Centres Alliance was invited to address the Cabinet. They opposed the proposed £1.3million of cut to Children’s Centres and appealed to the Cabinet to withdraw these proposals. The content of the cuts included:
The Children’s Centre Alliance disputed how the council can achieve increased outreach work with fewer buildings and staff. They pointed to the significant work of Children’s Centres as set out in the document ‘a day in the life of a child’. They described an oversubscription of places and contended that there were nurseries in the most deprived areas of the borough. The Alliance further asked why the children’s centres were proposed for reduction because if a Labour government got into power they may reverse this situation with additional funding for centres.
The Leader responded and spoke about the services provided by the Children’s Centre. Not all the Children’s Centre settings provided child care and some were better used than others. There was a need to provide more services to children in the community but with less expenditure on buildings and this would be through outreach services and making sure more families make use of services.
The Alliance further disputed how the outreach could be achieved with less centres and reduced staff.
The Cabinet Member for Economic Development, Social Inclusion, and Sustainability spoke to the deputation and reiterated the importance given to Children Centres and sure start which was one of the best innovations for early intervention. Councillor Goldberg spoke about meeting the needs of all children and the Cabinet was clear that there was a need to invest in early help to deter problems , help achieve outcomes and support families. There was a need to recognise that the current structure of the children’s centres could be excluding those most in need .The council needed to meet the demands of these families too.
In response to this, the Alliance spoke about the importance of early years and how they were supporting families in the middle or at the edge of requiring social support .They further felt that families making use of the centres and not perceived as coming from poor backgrounds should not be stigmatised as they may also be facing financial difficulties and rely on the support of childcare places.
When discussing how to define children in need and know how much reach the Children’s Centres have, the Leader explained that reach numbers would include a parent that had attend a session once. Therefore, It would be important to establish the reach and the depth of children’s centres relationship with families going forward.
The Cabinet Member for Children and Families responded in full to the deputation and acknowledged that the Children’s Centres do a lot of work for children in the borough and this was recognised. However, the council needed to make savings in the best way possible and ensure that services to vulnerable children were maintained whilst not stigmatising families. The council would be aiming for a universal offer and targeting services at those children that most need it and therefore children’s centres were still part of the early help offer. There was a need to: better signpost information about services in the community for families, provide a locality for 0-19 year’s support. In taking forward the budget proposals in relation to children’s centres and child care subsidy ,officers would be having detailed conversations with Children’s Centre clusters to get the best solution possible within the budget envelope allocated and welcomed the Children’s Centres Alliance working with the council to find the best possible solutions for children in the borough.
Deputation 6 – opposition to Children’s Centre closures – Triangle parents forum
Julia Jarvis Knell of the Triangle Parents Forum addressed the Cabinet, echoed the statements of the Children’s Centres Alliance and put forward the personal views of parents using the Triangle children’s centre. The parents were concerned about the impact of the savings on the centre where there was hard working dedicated staff looking after their children. The parents were just beginning to hear about the proposed savings and were concerned about the impact on the centre. They highlighted the benefits of children’s centre in the community in helping parents be able to work and felt that families would be forced to leave areas if they could not get affordable childcare. The parents wanted to be a part of the negotiation process on working out what the savings will mean and how they will be implemented.
Councillor Waters, Cabinet Member for Children and Families responded on the next stages of the budget recommendations. So far ,there had been consultation on the headline budget reductions concerning Children’s Services and therefore it was too early to set out how the savings will be fully implemented . The Cabinet Member for Children and Families took into consideration that there were Children’s centre representatives with ideas on how to run the centres. There would be further meetings with the Clusters and the Triangle Parents Forum were welcome to participate in this dialogue. These were informal discussions at the moment but there would be proposals on the future of Children’s centres submitted to Cabinet in June when there would follow a formal consultation process.
The Cabinet Member for Children and Families recognised that childcare in London was expensive, there were 500 children in Children centres. This was a small proportion in relation to the overall number of children aged 0-4 in the borough. It was important to ensure that the subsidised rate better benefitted vulnerable children.
The Leader thanked all the deputation parties for coming to the meeting and putting forward their representations in relation to the budget.