Non-Executive Report of the:
Meeting (Overview and Scrutiny)
24th May, 2021
Report of Janet Fasan Divisional Director Legal and Monitoring Officer	Classification: Unrestricted
Call-In Black, Asian & Minority Ethnic Inequalities Commission Report

Originating Officer(s)	David Knight
Wards affected	ALL

CONSIDERATION OF THE “CALL IN”

Having met the “Call In” request criteria, the matter is referred to the OSC in order to determine the “Call In” and decide whether to refer the matter back to Cabinet for further consideration.

The following procedure is to be followed by the Committee for consideration of the “Call In”:

Chair to invite a call-in member to present call-in.

Chair to invite members of the Committee to ask question.

Chair to Invite Cabinet Member to respond to the call-in.

Chair to invite members of the Committee to ask questions.

Followed by a general debate.

It is open to the OSC to either resolve to take no action (which would have the effect of endorsing the original Mayoral decision/s), or to refer the matter back to the Mayor for further consideration setting out the nature of its concerns and possibly recommending an alternative course of action.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC) considers:

1.	The contents of the attached report, review the Mayor in Cabinet’s decision (provisional, subject to Call In) arising; and

2.	Decide whether to accept the decision or to refer the matter back to the Mayor with proposals and reasons.

The Cabinet on 24th March 2021 considered a report from the Black, Asian & Minority Ethnic Inequalities Commission as a result of discussions on the report it was RESOLVED to:

note the work the Commission has undertaken during the four-month period and agree the recommendations set out in the report.

The decision above has been ‘Called-In’ by Councillor Puru Miah (signed also by Councillors Peter Gold; Rabina Khan; Harun Miah and Andrew Wood). This is in accordance with the provisions of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules of the Council’s Constitution.

N.B.	In accordance with the OSC Protocols and Guidance adopted by the Committee at its meeting on 4th June 2013, any Member(s) who present(s) the “Call In” is (are) not eligible to participate in the general debate.

REASONS FOR THE “CALL IN”

The decision is in breach of Tower Hamlets Council’s common law duty and statutory duties under the law.

1. Tower Hamlets Council is in breach of its common law duty to consult.

When the BAME Inequalities Report was launched in October 2020, one of its stated aims was:

“Engage and operate at the heart of Tower Hamlets’ communities to hear about people’s lived experience and solutions, specifically Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic women and young people who experience higher levels of inequality.”

Therefore, residents, especially BAME residents had legitimate expectations for Tower Hamlets Council to keep its promise and to consult them fairly, or allow BAME residents, the proper means to engage with the Commission.

Tower Hamlets Council has not kept to that promise in regard to consultation and engagement of BAME residents with the commission or the report. For example:

All the consultations were conducted online. In a borough with high levels of data poverty, which disproportionately affects the BAME residents.

No translations were provided in a consultation aimed at BAME residents, many of whom have difficulties with the English language.

2. Tower Hamlets Council is in breach of its statutory duties, in particular, the Public Sector Equalities Duty as set out in s.149 of the Equalities Act 2010.

By inadequately providing the means for BAME residents to engage with the commission and consultation, Tower Hamlets Council has failed in its Public Sector Equalities Duties. In particular, the duty to encourage people from protected groups to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is disproportionately low.

The Council in its consultation and engagement with the Commission and report has failed to give due regards to the needs of BAME residents.

3. The decision to note the report within a week of its publication is irrational.

The decision to note the report within a week of its publication by the Mayor and Cabinet, when adequately not enabling BAME residents to engage with the Commission or its consultation goes against the stated object of the report. It is also unreasonable for the Mayor and Cabinet to believe that less than a one-week period is adequate to garner views on a report that took five months to formulate.

4. Tower Hamlets Council has failed to apply the MacPherson Principles and investigate allegations of discrimination

Serious allegations of discriminations were made to the Commissioners. Yet the report nor the Mayor and Cabinet applied the MacPherson principles in treating the allegations as racist incidents and investigating them.

Leaving Tower Hamlets Council open to the charge of a cover-up, by failing to investigate adequately allegations of racial discrimination.

ALTERNATIVE COURSE OF ACTION PROPOSED

In order to mitigate against the above failures and breach of common law and statutory duties by Tower Hamlets Council.

Proposal 1: For Mayor and Cabinet not to note the report, but to have it translated into community languages and produced in a non-digital format which should then be distributed in places like Ideas stores and GP surgeries. Then put out to further consultation for a six-month period.

Proposal 2: For an independent panel to be formed to investigate the allegations of racial discrimination made to the Commission. And for the panel to report its finding to the full council.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee (OSC) considers:

1.	The contents of the attached report, review the decision (provisional, subject to Call In) arising; and

2.	Decide whether to accept the decision or to refer the matter back to the Mayor with proposals and reasons.