(Under provisions of Article 6 Para 6.02 V of the Constitution).

The Mayor and Cabinet considered the tabled report from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the Call-In of the Drug and Alcohol Action Team Commissioning report from Cabinet on 23 July 2014.

DECISION

1.    That after consideration of the report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the original decision taken at Cabinet on 23 July 2014 be reaffirmed.

CORPORATE DIRECTOR, COMMUNITIES, LOCALITIES AND CULTURE (S. HALSEY)

(Service Head, Community Service (A. Bamber)

(DAAT Co-ordinator (R. Sadegh)

The Mayor and Cabinet considered the tabled report from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the Call-In of the Drug and Alcohol Action Team Commissioning report from Cabinet on 23 July 2014.

RESOLVED

1.    That after consideration of the report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the original decision taken at Cabinet on 23 July 2014 be reaffirmed.

The OSC considered the report “Cabinet Decision ‘Call In’ “Drug and Alcohol Action Team (DAAT) Commissioning Intentions” comprising of the report considered, and subsequent decision taken, by the Mayor in Cabinet on 23 July 2014, (published 25 July 2014) together with the reasons for “Call In”/ alternative course of action set out in the Call In requisition, signed by Councillors Rachael Saunders, Shiria Khatun, Danny Hassell, Sirajul Islam and Clare Harrisson, in accordance with the provisions of 4 of the Council’s Constitution (Call In requisition presented 31 July 2014 and later declared valid).

The Chair welcomed: Councillors Rachael Saunders, Clare Harrisson and Danny Hassell, three of five Councillors who had Called In the decision of the Mayor in Cabinet and also Councillors Alibor Choudhury (Cabinet Member for Resources) and Ohid Ahmed (Cabinet Member for Community Safety), Andy Bamber (Service Head Safer Communities, CLC) and Ms Rachael Sadegh (Joint Commissioning Manager for Tower Hamlets DAAT, Safer Communities, CLC) who were in attendance to respond to the “Call-in”.

Councillor Saunders presented the “Call-in”: summarising the reasons for “calling in” the Decision, outlining the key concerns of the “Call-in” Members, and setting out the action sought from the OSC to address these; also subsequently responding to questions from the OSC. Concerns of “Call-in” Members and OSC Members summarised as follows: -

·           Concern that the recommendations made by Officers had been modified in Cabinet to provide a role for the two Cabinet Members. Both the reason for the modification and the role of the two Cabinet Members were considered to be unclear.

·           The next stages of the commissioning/ procurement process and service standards were currently not transparent. There was insufficient information for the OSC to identify service standards and determine if the best balance of quality and cost would result from the proposed approach.

·           Consideration that the decision to revise the officer recommendations of Option 3 to agree a consortium approach would impact on service users, as instead of mitigating atomisation of provision with a small number of providers a plethora of local providers would result.

·           Member involvement in the commissioning/ procurement process, and the timing of this was of concern as the two should be separate. Also what was the rationale for Member involvement in this process but not in the process for Direct Payment Support Service (DPSS).

·           Clarification was sought and given as to the number of current service providers and those bidding and their local credentials. However the Chair requested that a list of contract value parameters and those organisations currently holding the contracts be circulated to all OSC members. Comment also that most of the organisations bidding were not local. Accordingly concern expressed, given the Cabinet Member for Resources’ stated purpose to protect local organisations, that only one of the relevant organisations, NAFAS, was a local organisation.

·           Concern that well known/ reputable organisations, some with a global reach, that were currently providing services were now proposed for decommissioning.

The above named Cabinet members and Officers responded to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5

DECISION

1.    To agree to the re-procurement of drug / alcohol treatment services in Tower Hamlets

2.    To agree Option 3 as the preferred option for re-procurement subject to the Cabinet Members for Resources and Community Safety being given a strategic and design oversight of the proposals.  

3.    To agree to a consortium approach to commissioning to ensure local third sector partners can be properly engaged.

4.    To agree the timescales detailed in the report

5.    To note the risks detailed in the report and the mitigating actions.

Action by:

CORPORATE DIRECTOR, COMMUNITIES, LOCALITIES AND CULTURE (S. HALSEY)

(Service Head, Community Service (A. Bamber)

(DAAT Co-ordinator (R. Sadegh)

Councillor Ohid Ahmed, Cabinet Member for Community Safety, introduced the report. He highlighted the reasons why a review was needed and noted the different options presented. He felt that Option 3, as set out in paragraph 3.12 of the report, was the best option.

During discussion Councillor Alibor Choudhury proposed two amendments to the recommendations. He stated concurred that Option 3 was the preferred option but that the Cabinet Members for Resources and Community Safety should have oversight of the proposals. He also requested that a further recommendation be introduced to agree a consortium approach to ensure local third sector providers could be involved.

The Mayor concurred with the comments and stated that it was important to bring on board the expertise available in local community organisations. He agreed the recommendations set out in the report with the above two amendments.

RESOLVED

1.    To agree to the re-procurement of drug / alcohol treatment services in Tower Hamlets

2.    To agree Option 3 as the preferred option for re-procurement subject to the Cabinet Members for Resources and Community Safety being given a strategic and design oversight of the proposals. 

3.    To agree to a consortium approach to commissioning to ensure local third sector partners can be properly engaged.

4.    To agree the timescales detailed in the report

5.    To note the risks detailed in the report and the mitigating actions.