The Chair, Councillor Jackson welcomed all parties and read out an email  from Cllr Choudhury which questioned why the meeting was held at a time knowing that key executive members were scheduled to attend a statutory event. The Chair stated that the date of the meeting was chosen as it was the last date that the call-in could be heard in order to allow time for the Mayor to respond before the Christmas holidays. Moreover, she stated that she had invited the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and all lead members in turn to the meeting, which was the only date that a quorate could be assured, but had been refused by all.

The Chair began the meeting by informing the committee about information she has obtained since the call in and prior to this meeting.  She continued that she had requested specific information from Aman Dalvi such as, details of the grant applications including officer assessments at all stages including drafts, the draft reports and papers on the 3^rd Sector Grants Board, including minutes, and a geographical breakdown of the grants proposals.

The Chair, highlighting her concerns, raised the following points:

·        She queried why the original officer recommendations produced on 14 August 2011 were rejected as the reasons given were, in her judgement, spurious.

·        That Equality Impact Assessments (EQIA) has been reviewed and changed and the original approach and processes for Assessment amended.

·        That organisations that had proven track records have either had their funding cut or not received any grant at all for reasons not substantiated.

·        She raised concerns that funding had been allocated to organisations which had been judged as not eligible for funding by officers.

·        The mapping report did not show how funding had been allocated across the borough and there was no stated Mayoral policy to fund some areas to a greater extent than others. Organisations based in the E1 and E2 areas appear to have received a higher proportion of funding than E3 and E14. 

·        That there were documents missing from the MSG documentation folders and this was unexplained.

·        The funding allocation was not conducted in a transparent way, nor had it followed proper guidelines. 

·        Many of the applications in the MSG folders had colour banding which needs further explanations.

Councillor Motin Uz-Zaman for the Call-In Members referred to the reasons in

their requisition and made the following comments:

·        He expressed disappointment that members ‘called in’ were not present at the meeting to be held to account.

·        Noted that whilst some of the funding recommendations presented at Cabinet had been reversed, not all the concerns raised had been addressed

·        The cuts in funding in some areas, including social welfare advice, were not forced upon the administration but rather imposed by the Mayor. In contrast, neighbouring boroughs including Islington and Camden have increased funding for social welfare advice. Despite an overall increase in the amount of funding put into the MSG programme, this had not been directed into continued support for organisations with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3

The Chair welcomed Councillor John Peck in accordance with the provisions of Part 4 of the Council’s Constitution and also Councillor Alibor Choudhury, Cabinet Member for Resources to respond to the call-in.

In his presentation to the Committee, Councillor Peck assisted by Councillor John Pierce outlined the reasons for the call-in and the concerns. Councillor Peck explained his concerns related to the process, the impact on organisations doing critical work in the borough, the nature of the new organisations receiving funding and the geographical balance of organisations recommended to receive funding. 

In terms of process, there no evidence that an Equalities Impact Assessment had been undertaken, which risked the Council being exposed to judicial review. He was concerned that the officer recommendations had been significantly changed by the Executive, and that this part of the process was not transparent. He also expressed concern that the process was still being progressed, rather than being paused, as should happen when a decision is subject to a Call-in. This breached the Council’s Constitution.

There had also been complaints from organisations about long delays and that the process kept changing.

A key concern was the significant cuts in funding to social welfare advice agencies. In some cases, organisations may have to close down as they would no longer be viable. The Council should be supporting such groups in this current economic climate and in light of the welfare benefits cuts. Cutting these services at a time when they are most needed would impact upon some of the most vulnerable people in the borough.

Councillor Peck also raised concerns about the organisations receiving funding for the first time, or significant increases in funding. He suspected they had strong links to the Mayor and his political network. Finally, he argued that the geographical spread of funding across the borough was not balanced, or linked to the level of deprivation in the borough and was therefore unfair. The areas in the south and east of the Borough would suffer the most from the welfare cuts as they were the most impoverished as showed at the recent seminar.  How does the proposals relate to this need?

The process had raised serious questions in the community regarding why some very experienced groups were loosing major funding and new ones were having major increases in grant. 

Councillor Peck requested that the officers original recommendations, made to the Corporate Grants Programme Board  (CGPB) be published; that the Equalities Impact Assessment be published; That all decisions be reviewed to looked at equity and geography; and that the money in the social welfare advice services budget be allocated to advice groups with a good track record in this area.

Councillor Alibor Choudhury responded to these points. He stressed that no decisions have yet been made and the Mayor and Cabinet wanted to consult the Overview and Scrutiny Committee as part of the ongoing process. He underlined that the Executive fully supported the voluntary sector; that the Council had received 100 more applications  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5

Please note that the order of business was varied to allow this Agenda item to be considered after Item 2 (Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests).  However, for ease of reference the minutes are set out in the order in the agenda.

Councillors Ohid Ahmed, Alibor Choudhury, Rabina Khan and Rania Khan declared pecuniary interests in this item and left the room for the duration of the discussion.

Special Circumstances and Reasons for Urgency

The Mayor informed Members of the Cabinet that the special circumstances and reasons for urgency associated with the proposals were detailed in the report. The Mayor subsequently agreed the special circumstances and reasons for urgency as set out in the report and also set out below:

The commissioning process for mainstream grant funded activities has experienced an unprecedented increase in applications with over 430 applications for MSG support, and it is for that reason that an extension of current contracts to the end of December 2012 was approved by the Mayor in Cabinet at the meeting of 5th September. The assessment process is now complete and in order to comply with the TH Compact, and give reasonable notice to organisations, so they can make required changes to service provision and where necessary establishments, a decision is now required to progress with the next stage of the commissioning process.

Chris Holme, Service Head Resources, Development and Renewal introduced the report. He highlighted the processes that had been undertaken to produce the recommendations presented to the Mayor in the report.

During discussion a number of issues were raised including:

·        The importance of the grants programme during a time of economic difficulties.

·        The need to find innovative ways of working with the third sector to deliver services.

·        Questions as to whether all necessary information was contained in the report and the delays experienced in the process.

·        Overall allocations to particular sectors such as social welfare advice were at appropriate levels.

·        The need to ensure that if new bids were replacing existing services that care was taken to ensure they were an improvement.

Responding to questions, officers stated that:

·        The Equality Impact Assessments would set out the evidence basis for the recommendations.

·        The Mayor would have additional funds to allocate later in the year.

The Mayor highlighted his commitment to the grants programme and the value he placed on the Council’s partnership with the third sector. He stated that there would be a number of difficult decisions to take and that it was clear that some organisations wished the recommendations be reviewed.

Decision

1.      To notify all groups who have applied for Mainstream Grants that the Mayor is minded to accept the recommendations of the Board as detailed in the report and to invite them, if they are dissatisfied by the recommendation to request a review within 7 days of being notified so a decision on the actual awards can be made as soon as possible.