Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, please see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.

Members are reminded to declare the nature of the interest and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it’s the Members’ responsibility to declare any interests form and to update their register of interest form as required by the Code.

If in doubt as to the nature of your interest, you are advised to seek advice prior to the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services

The following Member for transparency declared a potential interest in relation to:

1.    Item 9 Pre-Decision Scrutiny Questions Councillor Marc Francis due to his wife Councillor Rachel Blake being the Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Adults, Health and Wellbeing.

To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 22/11/2021.

RESOLVED

That the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 22^nd November 2021be approved as a correct record of the proceedings and the Chair was authorised to sign them accordingly.  Subject to the following amendment:

Minute 15 Victoria Park

Delete: “Therefore, it would be helpful if the Committee could have a note explaining why this was not seemed to be a key decision” and insert: Therefore, it would be helpful if the Committee could have a note explaining why this was not deemed to be a key decision.

MATTERS ARISING

9.1         Waste and Recycling (22^nd November 2021)

Noted that following the spotlight on Waste and Recycling services on 22^nd November 2021 the Chair advised the Committee that he had submitted the  recommendations to Councillor Asma Islam (Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning) and (i) had asked for a written response to the  recommendations; (ii) as soon as this is received it will be circulated to the Committee.

Members are asked to note the Action Log

The Committee noted that it had received the response regarding the Liveable Streets recommendations as detailed in the Action Log.

In addition, it was noted that there were the following action log items:

v  A breakdown of the recent Autumn Budget and Spending Review announcement and the projected implications for Tower Hamlets.

v  A report on the review of Leisure Centres that was to be provided to the Committee; and

v  A written note to be provided with an explanation as to why the  decision to agree the extension of AEG was not considered to be a key decision.

To receive any petitions (to be notified at the meeting).

Nil items.

The Committee is asked to note:

1.    The most recent editions of the Forward Plan.

2.    The Forthcoming Decisions Plan (or 'Forward Plan') will be published at least 28 days before each Cabinet meeting setting out information on all the Key Decisions that are expected to be taken at that meeting, along with other Cabinet decisions where known.

3.    Publication dates for future Forthcoming Decision Plans are available on the Cabinet web pages. In advance of being published on the new Plan, individual notices of new Key Decisions will be published as they are known and these are listed as New Issues.

The Committee noted Cabinet forward plan as of 16^th November 2021 and that for the most up to date version, Members were recommended to check the Cabinet web pages on the council’s website.

No decisions of the Mayor in Cabinet (22/09/2021) in respect of unrestricted reports on the agenda were ‘called in’.

Nil Items.

To consider the council’s progress against its strategic priorities for housing with a focus on scrutinising the delivery of new homes.

The Committee received a presentation that provided an overview of the Council’s activities to deliver housing priorities over the last 18 months and covered (i) housing projects delivered; (ii) work in progress; (iii) planned work including the key housing challenges; and (iv) an update on the Housing Revenue Account (HRA). The main points raised as a result of questioning maybe summarised as follows:

The Committee:

v  Was pleased to hear on the progress being made with house building and welcomed the volume of buyback on right to buy properties to house homeless households.

v  Noted The buyback scheme has benefits for both the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and the general fund. In terms of the former, the additional stock will help to sustain the HRA rental income whilst assisting in mitigating the financial pressure arising from the increased cost and requirements for temporary accommodation to house homeless households in the general fund.

v  Noted that many councillors have seen a deterioration in the quality of service being offered by most registered housing providers who are managing and maintaining existing homes, providing associated services within Tower Hamlets e.g. housing repairs and anti-social behaviour (ASB).

v  Was reminded that Tower Hamlets Housing Covenant had set out a commitment by the Borough, its ALMO Tower Hamlets Homes and registered providers with homes in the borough to work together to (i) provide quality value for money housing services; (ii) share a commitment to Tower Hamlets residents; and (iii) maximise the supply of affordable housing and housing options.

v  Noted that covenant signatories were required to 1 Listen to and respect residents’ views; 2 Respect diversity and provide inclusive services; 3 Operate transparently and openly; and work cooperatively with properly constituted and representative resident groups; 4. Respond to Members’ Enquiries and information requests within published timescales; 5. Ensure residents live in warm, safe, weathertight, and decent homes; 6. Remedy resident repair requests in an appropriate and timely manner; 7. Actively participate in tackling Anti-Social Behaviour; 8. Be members of the Common Housing Register; 9. Evidence value for money in service provision; 10. Share key performance data to identify and share best practice; 11. Maximise opportunities for residents to take-up work, training and apprenticeships; and 12. Identify opportunities for Right-to-Buy receipts generated in the Borough to be invested in new housing in Tower Hamlets.

v  Commented that it would be of use to be able to identify which of the partner housing associations in the Borough are delivering against the  twelve objectives.

v  Noted that there are number of ways that the Council can work with its partners e.g. the Borough therefore shares and promotes good practice.

v  Noted that some registered housing providers are very positive about  strong partnerships in the Borough and that they do not see that within all councils.  Although not every housing provider is engaging to the same level and there is a challenge there the Lead Member; the Mayor and other ward members have very challenging conversations with housing providers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.1

To review the budget consultation report and this is contributing to the budget setting process. process in line with the Council’s priorities.

Members are asked to refer to the report included in the Cabinet agenda 15^th December, 2021.

Tower Hamlets Council - Agenda for Cabinet on Wednesday, 15th December, 2021, 5.30 p.m.

The Committee noted that in March 2022, the Council will agree its budget for 2022-23 and in line with previous years, the Council has carried out consultation with residents, businesses, and other key stakeholders to help inform the budget setting process. The results of the Council’s 2022-23 budget consultation carried out from October to November 2021 were outlined in the report.  The key points of the discussion may be summarised as follows:

The Committee:

v  Welcomed that budget consultation undertaken earlier this year and noted that the findings from the consultation will be incorporated into the budget setting process.

v  Noted that the headline findings from the budget consultation highlighted Community Safety as the top concern for residents which is a shift from the previous year which had been on Public Health.

v  Noted on the top line analysis of the settlement but wanted clarity on the potential £18 million extra available to the Council than originally assumed as result of government delays on the business rate re-set and felt that the historical underestimation on budget setting often posed unnecessary risks to cutting services.

v  Commented that it had been very useful to get a sense of the public mood and expressed the hope that the results from the consultation will play its part on next year’s budget.

Following a full and wide-ranging discussion, the Chair thanked all those Committee Members in attendance together with Councillor Candida Ronald (Cabinet Lead Member for Resources and Voluntary Sector); Nisar Visram (Director of Finance, Procurement and Audit Interim); and Kevin Bartle(Corporate Director, Resources & Section 151 Officer) for their contributions to what had provided Members sense of the public’s mood.

Accordingly, the Committee resolved that:

v  It looked forward to reviewing the budget and will seek to understand how the findings from the budget consultation have been taken on board.

To review the priorities and strategic goals of the Youth Justice Board.  The report is a policy framework item so will be presented to Cabinet and then Full Council. 

Members are asked to refer to the report included in the Cabinet agenda 15^th December, 2021.

Tower Hamlets Council - Agenda for Cabinet on Wednesday, 15th December, 2021, 5.30 p.m.

The Committee received a report that outlined the priorities and strategic goals of the Youth Justice Board and as a committee we have an opportunity to review this plan and provide our comments and feedback.

For now, the key points for the Committee are:

v  Noted that Young People’s service has an ongoing internal auditing processes that are embedded within the services practice, although there are also a number of annual external audits which are commissioned with other local authorities as well as the (HMIP) Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) which makes recommendations to identify and disseminate effective practice, challenge poor performance and encourage improvement.

v  Noted that with regard to Tower Hamlets restorative justice practice whilst the performance has been variable over the years the majority are young adults and not children under 18. In terms of the custody Tower Hamlets (i) has very few young people in custody and maintains a close working relationships with those institutions holding the young people; and (ii) maintains a critical eye on the practices in those settings to ensure that the young people are kept safe and that their offending and education are being addressed.

v  Was pleased to note whilst the report stated that reoffending rate was 41% in report there has been a positive trajectory and currently the rate is between 34% to 35% and this was not was not unexpected and it is anticipated this trend will continue.  Accordingly the Committee asked to receive an update on these figures so as to monitor progress.

v  Expressed concern that Black, Asian and minority ethnic young people receive  harsher sentences and noted that the action plan is designed to target each partner agency.  Although the multi-agency panels tasked to scrutinise decisions held in March 2020 and March 2021 had agreed with all but 1 of the decisions that had been made, suggesting that generally the right decisions as a service in terms appropriate disposal have been made.

v  However, agreed that attention needs to be considered to the disproportionate representation of black young people in the criminal justice system and welcomed the ongoing work being done to address.

v  Welcomed (i) the regular dialogue and early engagement with statutory partners including voluntary sector and young people through a series of workshops with the purpose of developing the vision and strategy for this plan; (ii) that First Time Entrants (key performance indicator) continues to decrease and recent data suggests this has been the lowest in the last three years; (iii) that the service continues to track and monitor the Boroughs young people in custody and whilst holding a critical eye, maintain a healthy relationship with the custodial establishments; and (iv) the preparations being undertaken for the Youth Justice Service Inspections (expected in early 2022) including setting outcomes to measure the effectiveness of the Youth Justice Board.

As a result of discussions on the report, the Chair (i) thanked all those Committee Members in attendance together with Councillor Asma Begum (Statutory Deputy  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.2

To track the progress of the recommendations arising from the Premises Charges and Community Benefit Rent Reduction Scheme Scrutiny Challenge Session.

The Committee received a presentation that provided an update on progress being made about progress on addressing the recommendations from the Premises Charges and Community Benefit Rent Reduction Scheme Challenge Session which had been undertaken in November 2019 and chaired by Councillor Tarik Khan former scrutiny lead for Resources and Finance. The main points raised because of questioning is summarised as follows:

The Committee:

v  Observed that in relation to community hubs agreeing their own pricing whilst the Council can guide and advise it is down to the organisations running the hubs to make sure that those hubs are used and utilized by the community. However, if no Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisation is identified to run these hubs, then the Council will have to take on the cost of maintaining; servicing and managing those hubs.

v  Noted on the issue of pricing whilst the VCS organizations that operate the hubs will have the freedom to set their own pricing, as part of the lease arrangement the Council will (i) have some degree of oversight on that pricing to ensure that the pricing is fair; (ii) expect premises to be accessible to organisations; and (iii) presume that the organisations managing the community hubs are essentially going to aim and operate on a cost recovery basis.

v  Noted that business rate relief is a critical advantage to VCS  organizations operating these buildings which enables them to run the premises on a more cost effectively basis than the Council could and therefore potentially to pass those savings onto those organisations that want to hire space in the buildings.

v  Noted that the most significant challenge is that of fairness because space is one of the Borough’s most scarce resources as highlighted in the earlier part of the committee meeting tonight regarding the Scrutiny Spotlight on Housing.

v  Acknowledged that for many community hubs just starting up one of the most challenging issues that they need to address is identifying their individual business activities and responsibilities e.g. duties around health and safety and managing a facility can become very challenging and an organisation does not have any experience in the management of such facilities then it can be really time-consuming and if an organisation gets it wrong that can have serious consequences for that organisation.

v  Commented that the Council have the experience and understanding of those complications to ensure those buildings are run safely and legally that can be shared with VCS organisations (e.g., policies in relation to health and safety).

v  Acknowledged that the presentation had illustrated how the outcomes that were included in the Cabinet report on 24^th March 2021 will be addressed in the future management of the community hubs.

v  Noted the Council in November 2016, agreed a scheme to reduce the rent payable for third sector organisations who meet specific criteria relating to the community benefit of their activities and their organisational governance and management, the Community Benefit Rent Reduction Scheme (CBRR). These new  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.1

To agree the findings and recommendations arising from the Parking Scrutiny Challenge Session.

The Committee reviewed the Parking Challenge Session report that outlines the findings and recommendations on the extent to which the Council’s parking permit policy influence’s people’s behaviour. The Report set out eight recommendations for agreement by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  The Challenge Session considered how (i) will the Council manages the demand for parking provision with the projected population growth to reach 361,400 by 2027 and also supported post pandemic business growth; (ii) will the Council continue to maintain its current levels of parking surplus given the

extrinsic change factors such as (a) the Mayor of London’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) expansion scheme that came into force on 25th October 2021; (b) more planned car free dwellings; (c) drop in footfall from passing trade for businesses; (d) work from home culture; and (e) inflationary costs to public transport; (iii) has the Council encouraged residents and businesses to switch to EV (Electric Vehicle)’s and ensure that they understand the implications for ULEZ expansion scheme; and (iv) capture any insights that help to understand residents behaviour and receptiveness to change, particularly those from lower economic background.  This challenge session provided the Committee with a chance to scrutinise the Council’s current approach to its parking permit policies and how it influences

resident’s behaviour.  The main points raised as a result of questioning maybe summarised as follows:

The Committee:

v  Noted that it was clear from the evidence heard that parking is an integral element of not only the transport strategy but many of the other council’s priorities and aspirations.

v  Acknowledged that striking the right balance for parking to accommodate the diverse needs of the Borough is an ongoing challenge.

v  Welcomed the Council’s ambition to reduce petrol and diesel vehicles to protect the environment and wanted the uptake of electric vehicles facilitated.

v  Recognised that there is an immediate need to manage the current demand for parking and align this with future demand.

v  Thanked Councillor Ahmed for taking the initiative to undertake this challenge session, which had examined an aspect of the Council services that warranted careful scrutiny.

v  Encouraged officers; the Lead Member and the Mayor to consider not just to read the recommendation and the narrative as it (i) explains the reason why those that were able to attend reached those conclusions; and (ii) is evidence of the extent of the problem.

v  Noted the challenges faced by residents and business including the number of empty parking bays that are not being fully utilised, that could be cascaded down to local businesses and residents.

v  Noted that with regard to the permit transfer scheme it is absolutely essential that more flexibility is introduced as the system is not working in a way that is fair and transparent to local residents.  In addition, the current the policy seems to discriminate against smaller families and those who want to downsize into smaller accommodation.

v  Agreed that the report’s recommendations are (i) not there to provide an answer to all  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.2

The Committee will receive updates from all the Scrutiny Leads in regard to their portfolio’s.  The written updates are attached any verbal updates will be presented at the meeting.

The Committee received and noted the updates submitted and also received the following verbal update from Councillor Marc Francis on behalf of Councillor Ehtasham Haque (Housing & Regeneration Scrutiny Sub Committee) regarding the Housing & Regeneration Scrutiny Sub Committee – held on Thursday, 2nd December 2021 6.30 p.m.  It was noted that:

The Sub-Committee had (i) considered a report on the performance of social housing landlords; (ii) received representations from the Tenants and Residents Association of Clare House, (as referenced in Minute 7.1 above); (iii) noted that the invitations to Spitalfields Housing Association (SHA) to attend both the 9^th September and this 19^th October meetings of the Sub-Committee had been declined, and that there were SHA residents in attendance who wished to raise concerns with their housing provider. Accordingly, it had been agreed to ask the Mayor what he intended to do about the ongoing situation with SHA and it is hoped that the sub-committee get a quick response on this issue.

To consider and agree pre-decision scrutiny questions/comments to be presented to Cabinet.

Following comments by the Committee the Pre-Decision Scrutiny Questions (PDSQ) Members agreed the particular questions/recommendations that they wanted to raise with Cabineton the 15^{th of} December 2021 (See attached appendix).

To consider any other unrestricted business that the Chair considers to be urgent.

The Committee noted that:

v  With no other business to discuss, the Chair called the meeting to a close; and

v  The next meeting will be on Tuesday, 11^th January 2022 on scrutinising the budget.

Finally, the Chair thanked scrutiny members, for their attendance and participation tonight and wished everybody a good festive break.

As the agenda circulated contained no exempt/confidential reports and there was therefore no requirement to exclude the press and public to allow for its consideration.

To consider any other exempt/ confidential business that the Chair considers to be urgent.

Nil items.