Agenda item

The Panel received a presentation on the Green Flag award scheme in Haringey, which had previously been given as part of an all member briefing session on 11^th February. The presentation was introduced by David Murray, AD for Environment and Neighbourhoods. The following arose from the discussion of the report:

a.    The Panel sought clarification about the changes that were proposed to the inspection regime of Parks. In response, officers advised that they were moving away from a Group Judging process which involved unannounced mystery shopping inspections, and back to a full planned inspection regime. Officers commented that they had received an unprecedented level of scrutiny through the Keep Britain Tidy (KBT) inspection regime and that that this had created a very large workload, in terms of responding to individual inspections and defects, as well as arranging follow-up visits. The new inspection regime would involve full inspections of every Green Flag park and was more challenging, but it would allow officers to plan inspections rather than respond reactively to the timings and programme of another organisation. Officers set out that the new regime would be collaborative and would allow a process of dialogue and challenge with the judges during inspections.

b.    The Panel requested an update on the flooding in Albert Rec. In response, officers acknowledge that this had been a long standing issue but emphasised that this was due to the topography of the area in question. Officers advised that hydrology reports had been undertaken and that there was a project underway to try and address the problem. Officers cautioned that resolving the problem would involve external fund raising and would likely run into 2020.

c.    The Panel enquired about proposals to engender behaviour change in parks and what this would involve. In response, the Cabinet Member advised that she wanted residents and service users to feel proud of their local park and to take ownership of it. Particularly in terms of disposing of their own litter but also through engagement on activities and events. A key part of this would involve engagement with stakeholder groups and getting them to be part of process of driving change.

d.    In response to this, the Panel cautioned that behaviour change alone could only achieve so much and members emphasised the need to also increase enforcement and inspections in the parks to ensure compliance. The Panel cautioned that greater involvement of friends groups and volunteers was not a replacement for parks officers and enforcement activities. Officers acknowledged these concerns and set out that they were not expecting friends groups to police parks. The Panel was advised that there had not been any budget savings made in the parks service in latest MTFS and there had been a firm commitment to maintain spending levels in parks. Officers emphasised that in the existing financial climate, with further reductions to local government budgets in the pipeline, the only way to increase the budget for parks was through additional income streams such as events.

e.    In response to concerns about how councillors could reassure members of the community that events would benefit smaller parks, officers emphasised that income generated from events would be ring-fenced for that specific park. Officers acknowledged that the Council needed to be better at engaging with users about what they would like the additional income to be spent on in individual parks. Officers also set out that the Parks team were good at monitoring events and withholding deposits from event organisers where damage had been done. Further work would be undertaken to ensure a proactive response to weather related issues such using straw in the event of heavy rain.

f.     In response to a question about how action plans and the individual actions contained therein would be prioritised, officers advised that this would be done in conjunction with key stakeholders such as members and friends of parks groups but that the process was still to be determined.

g.    In response to a question around external play equipment inspections, officers advised that these were carried out quarterly rather than the national standard of annually, due to the large amount of play equipment in the Borough. The inspections were carried out by the Play Inspection Company and officers confirmed that they were paid for carrying these out, to provide a warts and all assessment of the condition of the equipment.

h.    The Chair sought the Panel’s views on how it could best get involved in the Parks Improvement Plan as part of some detailed scrutiny work. The Chair advised that this work should take priority over the Scrutiny Review into Plastics for the time being, due to the level of interest involved and because there was an opportunity to take a real-time policy development role.  The Chair suggested that the work include some site visits, some evidence gathering sessions and some engagement work with residents.

i.      The Panel enquired about the action plan for parks and whether the Panel could scrutinize this as a first step. In response, officers agreed that an outline vision of where the Council wanted to be with its parks  along with an outline of its approach for the engagement and community visits could be made available relatively quickly. Officers advised that they would have to get this finalised and signed off by the Cabinet Member as a first step. It was envisaged that, all being well, this would likely take a couple of weeks.  Some key considerations for the Panel at this point would be about; how best to manage the engagement process, whether the correct people were being engaged with and how the Council could continue to build a relationship with KBT through the scrutiny process.

j.      Officers set out that this work would have a number of phases and emphasised that the first phase would be around sense checking the initial plans. Further phases around implementation and evaluation, particularly in terms of directing resources and managing community input into this prioritisation process, would follow. It was envisaged that the service offer for parks could be more reflective of local priorities and that it wouldn’t necessarily be a ‘one size fits all approach’.

k.    Officers agreed that they would come back to the Panel with an outline vision document and some initial engagement proposals. (Action: David Murray).  Following this, it was envisaged that the Panel would arrange an initial session to review those plans and that a site visit could follow from there.

l.      Following further questions about likely timescales in regards to site visits, Officers cautioned that they needed to pull together a schedule of activities that was flexible enough to reflect the wider workload of the team as well as provide worthwhile opportunities for the Scrutiny Panel’s involvement. In response, the Chair acknowledged the fact there were other issues at play as well as the need to work out the best way for the Panel be involved.

m.  The Cabinet Member for Environment advised that she was keen to here from Members and would welcome any suggestions at this early stage. (Panel members to note).

n.    In response to a question around the staffing resources available in Parks, officers set out that there were 55 staff in total and that this comprised of 36 gardeners as well as a further 8 seasonal gardeners. The workforce within the Parks service was reduced by around one-third in 2012, however no further reductions had been made since then. Furthermore, there had been no reduction in the size of the parks footprint in that time. Officers also advised that an additional horticultural crew was being added to increase maintenance in Green Flag parks.

o.    Members of the Panel emphasised the importance of horticultural maintenance and noted the difficulties that could exist in getting friends of parks groups involved in planting events. It was suggested that some groups had got to the stage where horticultural events took place and were well attended. It was further suggested that there was some learning to be shared among the groups on how to best achieve this. Officers acknowledged this and suggested that part of the initial work around the Parks Improvement Plan was around working out how to keep people engaged.

p.    The Panel suggested that the Kings Cross development could be a good venue for a site visit as part of the Parks Improvement Plan.

RESOLVED

That the work being undertaken as part of the Parks Improvement Plan was noted and comments were provided on how the Panel would like to be involved in shaping this plan.