Decisions

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST MADE FOR THIS ITEM:

None

RESOLVED:

That the Cabinet Member for Placemaking and Local Economy:

1. Approved the commencement of a tendering process for a construction works contractor for the Artificial Grass Pitch at Selby Urban Village development, using the Football Foundation’s AGP Framework.

Reasons for the decision:

The Selby Urban Village development comprised 202 new Council homes, a commercial unit, a community building, a changing pavilion, and enhanced park and sports facilities. The Council entered into a build contract for the construction of the Selby Urban Village development. The award of the contract was approved by Cabinet Member Signing on 19 February 2026 through the report Award of Main Works Contract for the Construction of Selby Urban Village, N17.

The Council secured grant funding from the Football Foundation to part-fund enhanced sports facilities at Selby Urban Village, including the construction of a 3G artificial grass pitch (AGP).

The 3G pitch provided all-weather, year-round access to multi-sports facilities, driven by the need to maximise access in the east of the borough where there was significant unmet demand for artificial pitches. This area experienced high socioeconomic deprivation relative to the rest of the borough, and the facilities improved the health and wellbeing of local residents and communities through sport and physical activity.

The Football Foundation’s grant conditions required that the artificial grass pitch be delivered by a works contractor appointed through a mini competition under the Football Foundation’s AGP Framework.

The estimated contract value for the AGP works required approval to commence a procurement exercise under the Council’s Contract Standing Order (CSO) 2.01.b), with the decision delegated to a Cabinet Member in accordance with CSO 0.08.The estimated cost of procuring and delivering the AGP had previously been reported and included within the overall Selby Urban Village Phase One project budget, which was approved in the Cabinet Report dated 19 February 2026.The AGP procurement programme was aligned with the main works delivery contract, with the site programmed to be handed over to the AGP contractor in December 2026 following completion of the cut-and-fill groundworks by the main contractor.

It was anticipated that the award of contract for the AGP works contractor would be brought forward for Cabinet or Cabinet Member approval in November 2026.

To enable access to the AGP Framework, the Council signed a Framework Joining Agreement with the Football Foundation in May 2026.

Alternative Options Considered

Do not tender for AGP works

The Council could have decided not to tender for or undertake the AGP works. However, the 3G artificial grass pitch was part-funded by the Football Foundation, and this approach would not have met the Foundation’s grant requirements. Consequently, the funding could not have been drawn down. The 3G pitch also formed a key component of the sporting facilities and commitments associated with the Selby Urban Village development.

Deliver natural grass pitches rather than a combination of natural and artificial pitches

The option of delivering only natural grass pitches was reviewed due to environmental considerations relating to artificial grass pitches. However, this option was discounted because natural grass pitches alone would have offered limited capacity. Sport England noted that “a properly maintained artificial grass pitch can sustain up to 80 hours of use a week, providing an average of around 1,400 playing opportunities. This compares favourably to a good-quality grass pitch, which can sustain just six hours a week, accommodating an average of around 100 playing opportunities.”

The Selby Urban Village development therefore proposed grass pitches for cricket and football alongside an all-weather 3G pitch, enabling year-round sport while improving sustainability and community health outcomes. The all-weather surface supported significantly greater capacity, allowing more teams across different age groups to train, compete and participate in activities, including youth engagement programmes, walking football, inclusive and disability provision, and training opportunities for referees and coaches.

In-house delivery of AGP works

There was no existing resource within the Council with the capacity, specialist expertise or qualifications required to deliver the AGP construction works. In addition, this approach would have been contrary to the Football Foundation’s grant requirements and would have prevented the grant funding from being drawn down.

Invitation to tender via the LCP Framework

Tendering through the LCP Framework would not have met the Football Foundation’s grant requirements and therefore would not have enabled the Council to draw down the available grant funding.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST MADE FOR THIS ITEM:

None

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet, after considering the information within the exempt appendices:

1.    Approved the Full Business Case for the replacement of the Council’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, including the procurement of an integrated ERP solution, its implementation, and, if required, business integration and support services.

2.    Approved the commencement of two linked procurement activities in accordance with Contract Standing Order (CSO) 2.01(b), comprising:

3.    Delegated authority to decide whether to proceed with the procurement of Business Integration services to the Corporate Director of Finance and Resources, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance and Corporate Services.

4. Approved a waiver of Contract Standing Order 6.03, pursuant to CSO 18.01.4(a), allowing the procurement to proceed with a Social Value weighting of 5%.
   
   
5. Approved the transformation element of the proposed budget, including implementation, stabilisation, licensing, support and associated costs, to be funded through the Flexible Use of Capital Receipts programme, subject to Full Council approval of the additional allocation required.
   
   
6. Noted that an increase in the revenue budget would be required when the new system became operational in July 2028. This would be considered through the 2028/29 budget-setting process and Medium-Term Financial Strategy.
   
   
7. Noted that:

·       the cost estimates were indicative and had been developed using market engagement, benchmarking, risk allowances and contingency provisions;

·       final contract values and the recommended supplier or suppliers would be subject to a future Cabinet decision; and

·       no cashable savings had been assumed at this stage, with potential benefits to be further assessed during procurement and implementation.

Reasons for the decision

The existing SAP ECC platform was approaching the end of mainstream support in December 2027. Following that date, the Council would have become increasingly dependent on third-party support arrangements and faced heightened risks relating to security, payroll operations, legislative compliance, system resilience and audit assurance.

The current system was also limiting operational efficiency. Core Finance, Procurement, Human Resources and Payroll processes relied on manual workarounds, offline spreadsheets, duplicate data entry and fragmented workflows. This increased the risk of errors, reduced efficiency and limited access to timely and reliable management information.

The recommended option was supported by a structured assessment process. The Council undertook market engagement, considered five options, and evaluated them against agreed criteria. Delivery approaches were tested through a Request for Information process and supported by a ten-year total cost of ownership assessment.

The Council was required to procure the technology, implementation, support and associated services in accordance with the Procurement Act 2023, Contract Standing Orders and relevant procurement legislation. The proposed route to market was a further competition through the Crown Commercial Service Back Office Software 2 (BOS2) framework.

The Council confirmed that it was an eligible contracting authority under the framework and that its requirements fell within the framework scope.

The Council intended to undertake one, and potentially two, linked procurement exercises in order to:

• secure an integrated ERP solution with clear accountability for implementation and ongoing support; and
• procure specialist Business Integration support, if required, to focus on organisational change, user adoption, process alignment and benefits realisation.
  
  

This approach reflected the Council's assessment that successful ERP implementation required both technology delivery and organisational change capability. The ERP Programme Board also considered whether Business Integration activities could be delivered internally and agreed that this option should remain under review.

If a separate procurement for Business Integration services was required, it would allow the Council to select the ERP technology first and then determine the most appropriate delivery model and support arrangements.

The financial model was developed using a prudent approach. It incorporated varying levels of cost certainty, risk allowances, contingency provisions and did not rely on unverified savings assumptions.

The decision was required to ensure sufficient time to procure, design, implement, test and stabilise a replacement ERP system before risks associated with the existing platform became unacceptable.

Alternative options considered

Do nothing / retain SAP ECC

This option would have retained the existing system and relied on extended support arrangements. It was not pursued because it did not provide a sustainable long-term solution, failed to address existing operational challenges and exposed the Council to increasing security, compliance, support and service continuity risks.

Direct award to the existing supplier

This option involved awarding a contract directly to the incumbent supplier. While considered legally and technically feasible, it was not selected because it would have reduced competition, limited commercial leverage and made it more difficult to demonstrate value for money when alternative suppliers were available within the market.

Competitive ERP procurement (preferred option)

This option involved conducting a competitive procurement exercise to identify the most appropriate ERP solution and delivery model. Following further development of the procurement strategy and market engagement, the proposed approach was to undertake a further competition under the Crown Commercial Service BOS2 framework.

This approach maintained competition, enabled comparison of alternative ERP solutions and delivery models, and provided a compliant and efficient procurement route. It was assessed as offering the best balance of value for money, implementation assurance, delivery confidence and risk management.

Separate systems for individual service areas

This option involved procuring separate systems for areas such as Finance and Procurement, and Human Resources and Payroll. It was not pursued because it would have introduced additional integration requirements, fragmented accountability, increased data synchronisation risks and generated higher long-term support costs.

The procurement approach could, however, accommodate limited partner components where there was a clear justification and appropriate controls.

Shared service arrangement

This option was also considered but not selected. Market engagement did not identify a shared service model capable of meeting the Council's implementation timetable, governance requirements and operational needs. Existing shared service providers were either unable to accommodate additional councils, were not aligned with the required timescales, or presented significant contractual and delivery risks.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST MADE FOR THIS ITEM:

None

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet, after considering the information within the exempt appendices:

1. Approved the appointment of Contractor A, identified in the exempt section of the report, to undertake the demolition of Whitehall Lodge and 2–32 Whitehall Street and to deliver 61 new Council homes at High Road West Phase 1A, for the contract value and contingency amount set out in the exempt report.
   
   
2. Approved the appropriation of Council-owned land within the Phase 1A site, comprising both General Fund and Housing Revenue Account land, for planning purposes under Section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972. The appropriation was to take place following demolition of the existing buildings on the site.
   
   
3. Agreed that the appropriation for planning purposes was temporary and necessary to enable demolition, site preparation and construction works required for the development.
   
   
4. Approved the use of the Council’s powers under Section 203 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016, following appropriation of the land, to override easements and other third-party rights or interests that could impede the development of the Phase 1A site.
   
   
5. Approved the subsequent appropriation of the Phase 1A site for housing purposes under Section 19 of the Housing Act 1985 following practical completion of the new-build development.
   
   
6. Delegated authority to the Director of Capital Projects and Property, in consultation with the Director of Finance and Resources, the Cabinet Member for Housing and the Monitoring Officer, to:
   • implement the appropriations referred to in the report and determine their timing;
   • take all necessary steps to enable reliance on Section 203 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016; and
   • agree the terms of, and authorise payment of, any compensation required as a result of exercising those powers.
     
     
7. Delegated authority to the Cabinet Member for Housing to approve extensions to the construction and consultancy contracts up to the maximum value set out in the exempt section, subject to approval through the Housing Delivery contingency process.
   
   
8. Approved the total scheme cost for Phase 1A as set out in the exempt report.
   
   
9. Approved the issue of a letter of intent for up to 10% of the contract value specified in the exempt report.
   
   
10. Approved implementation of the Love Lane Estate Management Plan and the associated budget set out in the exempt report. The plan included provision for future decommissioning and demolition, site security and investment in blocks scheduled for later phases of redevelopment.
    
    
11. Approved the commencement of procurement exercises under Contract Standing Order 2.01(b) for site security, decommissioning and demolition works relating to the Ermine, Charles and Moselle blocks once residents had been rehoused and the blocks vacated.
    
    
12. Delegated authority to the Cabinet Member for Housing, through a Cabinet Signing process, to approve the award of contracts for site security, decommissioning and demolition of the Ermine, Charles and Moselle blocks where contract values exceeded £500,000.
    
    
13. Agreed a total budget of £1.1 million for delivery of the Love Lane Estate Management Plan.
    
    
14. Delegated authority to the Director of Placemaking and Community Development to submit funding applications and receive and spend any funding secured in relation to temporary uses on the Love Lane Estate following demolition and before redevelopment, in accordance with Contract Standing Orders.
    
    

Reasons for the decision

The recommendations enabled the delivery of High Road West Phase 1A, which would provide 61 affordable homes on Council-owned land. The development would support the rehousing of more than half of the existing residents of the Love Lane Estate into permanent homes in accordance with the commitments set out in the Love Lane Landlord Offer, which had previously been supported through a resident ballot. As existing properties became vacant, subsequent phases of the High Road West programme would be able to proceed.

Planning permission for the wider High Road West scheme, including detailed consent for Phase 1A, was granted in October 2021. A subsequent non-material amendment was approved in July 2023. The site was therefore ready to move into the construction phase, and the report represented the final member-level approval required before implementation.

Contractor A was identified through a formal tender process. Approval of the contract award and land appropriation enabled the Council to enter into the construction contract and proceed with the development works.

The Love Lane Estate Management Plan was intended to ensure that the estate remained safely and effectively managed prior to redevelopment. The plan sought to support housing management, health and safety and community safety responsibilities, while also improving the living conditions of residents remaining on the estate during the rehousing process.

The block at 2–32 Whitehall Street formed part of Phase 1B of the wider Development Agreement. As the earliest anticipated transfer of the site for redevelopment was not expected until 2028, the block remained vacant and was experiencing anti-social behaviour issues affecting the surrounding area. Demolition was proposed to address these issues and create the opportunity for interim uses of the site that could benefit the local community. Any temporary use would remain compatible with future redevelopment proposals.

Delegated authority for future site security, decommissioning and demolition contracts was intended to ensure that the Council could implement the Estate Management Plan in a timely manner. The plan was designed to address health and safety considerations, support the management of vacant properties and maintain the effective operation of the estate during phased redevelopment. It also sought to retain the use of lower-rise blocks for housing where feasible during the transition period.

Alternative options considered

Not proceeding with the housing development

The Council considered not developing the site for housing. This option was not pursued because it would not have supported the delivery of additional affordable homes.

Not appropriating the land for housing purposes

The Council considered not appropriating the land for housing purposes following completion of the works. This option was not pursued because it could have prevented the new homes from being occupied and therefore hindered the delivery of the development.

Retaining Whitehall Lodge as temporary accommodation

The Council considered retaining Whitehall Lodge for temporary accommodation use. This option was not pursued because the site was required for Phase 1A. It would also have left a partially demolished site that was experiencing anti-social behaviour issues. In addition, the building was not considered suitable for long-term temporary accommodation use.

Not implementing the Love Lane Estate Management Plan

The Council considered not implementing the Estate Management Plan and not delegating authority to procure the associated contracts. This option was not pursued because delays in securing the necessary services could have reduced the Council’s ability to manage vacant properties, address anti-social behaviour, maintain health and safety standards and support phased rehousing effectively.

Retaining 2–32 Whitehall Street until redevelopment

The Council considered retaining 2–32 Whitehall Street and securing the building until redevelopment commenced. This option was not pursued because it would have continued to present risks associated with anti-social behaviour and would not have allowed interim community uses of the site to be explored.

The Council also considered bringing the building back into residential use prior to redevelopment. This option was not pursued because it would have required substantial investment that was not considered proportionate given the anticipated redevelopment timetable and the fact that the block was already vacant.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST MADE FOR THIS ITEM:

None

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet:

1.    Noted the provisional revenue and capital outturn for 2025/26

2.    Approved the capital carry forward requests

3.    Approved the transfers to/from reserves

4.    Approved the budget virements

5.    Noted the debt write-offs approved by officers in Quarter 4 of 2025/26

6.    Noted the Finance Recovery Closure report

Reasons for decision

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

It was necessary at year end to review the use of reserves and balances considering the financial position during the year and knowledge of the Council’s future position and requirements.

Alternative options considered

The Corporate Director of Finance and Resources, as Section 151 Officer, had a duty to consider and propose decisions in the best interests of the authority’s finances and that best support the delivery of the agreed Corporate Delivery Plan outcomes whilst addressing the Council’s financial sustainability.

This report by the Corporate Director of Finance and Resources had attempted to address these points. Therefore, no other options were presented at this time. 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST MADE FOR THIS ITEM:

None

RESOLVED:

That Cabinet, after considering the information within the exempt appendices:

1.    Approved the procurement of a multi-service call-off contract to support the delivery of void (empty property) refurbishment, compliance and remediation works across the Council's housing portfolio, as outlined in Section 1, for an initial five-year term with options to extend for up to two additional one-year periods (5+1+1).

2.    Noted that further Cabinet reports would be presented following completion of the procurement process, seeking approval to award the contracts. These reports would set out the outcome of the procurement, recommended contractors, contract values, affordability within approved budgets, and any associated financial implications for the Housing Revenue Account and General Fund.

Reasons for the decision

The Council continued to experience demand for void refurbishment, compliance and remediation works across a housing portfolio that included General Needs, Sheltered Housing, Temporary Accommodation, Hostels, Lodges, Acquisitions and Private Sector Leased properties managed by partner organisations. Properties that remained empty were unable to generate rental income and could incur additional costs relating to security, utilities, council tax and deterioration of the asset.

Delays in returning properties to occupation placed additional pressure on homelessness and Temporary Accommodation services by reducing the availability of housing stock and increasing the need for alternative accommodation arrangements. Given the range of property types, varying property conditions and differing service requirements, the Council required a flexible delivery model capable of responding to changes in demand and supporting the timely re-letting of properties.

The existing delivery model consisted of a combination of in-house resources and multiple contractor arrangements managed across different service areas. This resulted in separate commissioning arrangements, variations in performance management, differing specifications and pricing structures, and limited oversight of overall demand. A single multi-service contract was intended to provide additional capacity, improve coordination, standardise delivery and reporting arrangements, strengthen commercial oversight and reduce void turnaround times.

The anticipated scale and variability of demand across the housing portfolio indicated the need for a coordinated approach. The proposed procurement would establish a multi-provider call-off contract arrangement, enabling the Council to access additional capacity for void refurbishment, compliance and remediation works as required. No minimum value or volume of work would be guaranteed, and works would be commissioned only in response to operational requirements and within approved budgets. The arrangement was intended to provide flexibility, support value for money and assist in reducing rental income loss by returning properties to occupation more quickly.

Alternative options considered

Maintaining the existing arrangements

This option was not pursued. Retaining the existing delivery model would have continued the use of separate commissioning and contractor arrangements across housing services. This would have maintained pressure on in-house resources and limited the Council's ability to respond consistently to variations in demand.

Longer void periods could have reduced the availability of housing stock, increased costs associated with managing empty properties, reduced rental income to the Housing Revenue Account and General Fund, and resulted in higher repair costs where property conditions deteriorated. This option was not considered to provide the capacity or coordinated approach required to address service pressures effectively.

Short-term procurement arrangements

This option was considered but not pursued. While a series of short-term contracts could have provided additional capacity and maintained competition within the market, it would have required repeated procurement exercises and continued a fragmented commissioning approach.

The approach would likely have increased administrative costs, reduced opportunities for longer-term planning and supplier investment, and limited the Council's ability to establish consistent standards, performance management arrangements and pricing mechanisms. It was considered less effective in improving void turnaround performance, reducing rental loss and achieving value for money.

Fully in-sourced delivery model

This option was also considered but not pursued. The Council already operated an in-house voids service with a dedicated management structure and three teams of operatives, which was performing well against agreed targets. Historically, void refurbishment, compliance and remediation works had been delivered through a hybrid model combining in-house resources with external contractors to provide additional capacity, resilience and specialist expertise.

Although expanding the in-house service to undertake all works was considered, a fully in-sourced approach would have reduced flexibility in responding to fluctuations in demand. Demand for void works varied according to factors such as tenancy turnover, property condition, compliance requirements, housing acquisitions, regeneration activity and housing delivery programmes.

For example, neighbourhood moves schemes and regeneration-related moves could increase the number of void properties requiring inspection and refurbishment, while variations in property condition could significantly affect the scale and complexity of works required. As a result, both the volume and nature of demand could change considerably over time.

Maintaining sufficient in-house capacity to manage periods of peak demand would have required a substantially larger workforce than needed under normal operating conditions, creating a risk of underutilisation during quieter periods and reducing value for money. A fully in-sourced model would also have required significant investment and a lengthy mobilisation period to recruit, train and develop additional staff and management capacity.

The principal limitation of this option was its reduced flexibility and scalability. By contrast, the continuation of a hybrid model enabled the Council to retain its core in-house service while accessing external capacity when required. This provided greater flexibility, resilience and scalability, supported the timely return of homes to occupation and offered a more balanced approach to service delivery.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST MADE FOR THIS ITEM:

None

RESOLVED:

That the Cabinet Member for Tackling Inequality and Resident Services:

1.    Noted the annual Crisis and Resilience Fund (CRF) allocation from the Government of £5,932,161 for the three-year period from 1 April 2026 to 31 March 2029.

2.    Noted the expenditure of £2,470,000 authorised through the decision made on 24 March 2026.

3.    Approved the extension of free school meal holiday vouchers until September 2026 at an estimated additional cost of £966,000, followed by a more targeted approach to holiday payments for households experiencing financial hardship, to be determined later in the year in accordance with paragraph 3.12.

4.    Approved estimated expenditure of £1,742,338 for the expansion of the Financial Support Team, as detailed in the report.

5.    Approved estimated expenditure of £200,432 to increase the number of crisis fund decision-makers by two Benefits Officers for a period of two years.

6.    Approved estimated one-off expenditure of £30,000 for the development of a streamlined online application form integrating multiple crisis fund applications and a benefits calculator.

7.    Approved estimated expenditure of £220,221 to fund a strategic community coordination role supporting the design, co-production and delivery of the borough's approach to tackling poverty.

8.    Approved estimated expenditure of £206,357 for the administration of the scheme, including staff resources for Housing Payments and the year two cost of the Low-Income Family Tracker.

9.    Noted that all costs were estimates based on current data and forecasts and could vary according to actual demand and other relevant factors.

10. Approved delegated authority to the Corporate Director for Environment and Resident Experience to manage the budget in accordance with the principles and criteria set out in the Policy and the CRF outcome measures.

11. Agreed that the Policy in Appendix A would be updated to reflect the recommendations approved through the decision.

12. Delegated authority for the allocation of the remaining year one CRF funding, estimated at £1,575,332, to the Corporate Director for Environment and Resident Experience, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Tackling Inequality and Resident Services. This also included authority to allocate year two CRF funding to cover the Easter school holiday period, if required.

13. Noted the ongoing development of an Anti-Poverty Strategy to inform future updates to the Policy.

Reasons for the decision

Haringey Council remained committed to supporting residents experiencing financial hardship. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) provided funding to local authorities through the CRF, recognising that councils were well placed to allocate resources in response to local needs.

The CRF guidance allowed local authorities to determine how funding was allocated within the framework of the programme's objectives. The DWP also expected authorities to invest in preventative measures as well as direct crisis support.

The decision brought the year one CRF allocation to £4,356,829, the year two allocation to £1,088,335 and the year three allocation to £385,184. Funding was targeted at residents with the greatest identified need and was consistent with the aims of the scheme.

External modelling indicated that a significant proportion of benefits available to eligible residents in Haringey remained unclaimed, with an estimated value of £160 million. While the report authorised expenditure for only part of the available grant funding, it supported the development of services intended to help residents access their entitlement and navigate the benefits system. Further updates to the Policy were anticipated over the funding period to reflect the council's Anti-Poverty Strategy, emerging evidence and changing local needs.

The Policy extended support to September 2026 for low-income households with children eligible for free school meals through the provision of school holiday vouchers. This represented the maximum period for universal provision allowed under DWP guidance. The council was also reviewing arrangements for holiday support from the 2026/27 academic year onwards, with the intention of introducing a more targeted approach focused on households at risk of financial hardship while supporting longer-term financial resilience.

The redesign and expansion of the Council's Financial Support Team were intended to increase outreach activity and community-based support. Extended operating hours for the financial support helpline were also expected to improve accessibility for residents.

Additional funding was allocated to increase the number of officers making crisis support decisions, enabling more comprehensive assessments and associated support to be provided.

Approval was also sought to improve the Council's digital application process, enabling residents to apply for multiple crisis funds through a single online portal and receive information about potential benefit entitlement.

Alternative options considered

Consideration was given to delaying implementation until a full year one Policy had been developed. This option was not pursued because it would have delayed financial support and reduced the intended impact of the CRF.

Consideration was also given to committing the entire allocation at this stage. This option was not pursued because the council's Anti-Poverty Strategy was still being developed and was expected to inform future allocation of the remaining funding.

Other options considered included:

• Ending all school holiday support after September 2026.
• Implementing a smaller expansion of the teams responsible for crisis fund decisions and one-to-one financial support.
  
  

These options were not pursued because they were assessed as insufficient to meet the level of financial support need identified within the borough.