Apologies were received from Councillor Oliur Rahman.

To note any declarations of interest made by Members, including those restricting Members from voting on the questions detailed in Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act, 1992.  See attached note from the Interim Monitoring Officer.

Councillor Woods indicated that if there was to be any detailed discussion during Item 10 “Pre-Decision Scrutiny of Unrestricted Cabinet Papers”, he would need to declare a personal interest in Item 5.9 on that agenda which was the “Neighbourhood Planning: Isle of Dogs Neighbourhood Plan” as he had been involved in drafting much of the supporting documentation.

To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 23^rd November, 2017 – TO FOLLOW.

The Chair Moved and it was:-

RESOLVED

To defer consideration of the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 23^rd November, 2017.

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

Nil items

The Committee is asked to consider an update on the outstanding actions arising from the last meeting (to be notified at the meeting).

Noted

No decisions of the Mayor in Cabinet on 28^th November, 2017 in respect of unrestricted reports on the agenda were ‘called in’.

Nil items

The Committee received a presentation that covered the following:

                             I.        Violence Against Women & Girls (VAWG);

                            II.        Hate Crime;

                           III.        Rapid Response Team;

                          IV.        Prevent & Community Safety Partnership;

                           V.        Enforcement;

                          VI.        Crime Prevention;

                        VII.        Anti-Social Behaviour;

                       VIII.        Drugs & Alcohol – Criminal Justice;

                          IX.        Licensing Policy & Strategy;

                           X.        Trading Standards; and

                          XI.        Community Cohesion.

The questions and comments from Members on the presentation may be summarised as follows:

The Committee:

• Indicated their concerns that vulnerable young people are being exploited in order to facilitate the running of street level drug dealing within the Borough. In response it was noted that work is being undertaken with Hackney and Newham to address this issue;
• Noted that the primary purpose of stop and a search power is to enable officers to allay or confirm suspicions about individuals. However, it needs to be used in a respectful way;
• Noted that there is a North East London Domestic Abuse Forum that aims to bring together representatives from the many local agencies who work with those affected by domestic violence and abuse in North East London. The Forum shares good practice, increases awareness of domestic violence and identifies any gaps in services;
• Noted that with the use by the Police of body cameras together with other ways to gather evidence the Partnership can pursue prosecutions in Domestic Violence (DV) cases without reliance on any witnesses;
• Noted that LBTH had commissioned an independent DV investigator;
• Noted that work is being undertaken on a strategic action plan to address gang and knife crime (e.g. weapons sweeps and the education of young people about crime);
• Noted Deputy Mayor for London now has a Knife Crime Working Group and that as part of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy there is a bid for the funding on work for young people and violence;
• Noted that with regard to the Council funded police officers a targeted operational model has been developed;
• Noted that the Police and Health Services are working together in the Accident and Emergency Trauma Units regarding young people and crime;
• Noted the concerns within the Borough regarding the effectiveness of the 101 number and need to improve the increased reporting of Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB);
• Commented that it would wish to know how reporting of ASB this being developed and managed within Tower Hamlets;
• Noted that whilst calls to 999 will take priority over those to 101 in terms of back office support there is a recruitment campaign and work is being done to develop reporting on line and through social media;
• Noted if any Safer Neighbourhood Team has not contacted the local Ward Councillors then the Borough Commander needs to be advised;
• Noted that OWL (Online Watch Link) is used by the Metropolitan Police Service and Tower Hamlets in partnership with local Neighbourhood Watch coordinators to communicate with residents and businesses across the Boroughs. OWL is an advanced solution for police & communities to grow and manage Neighbourhood Watch, School Watch, Business Watch and dozens of other schemes. OWL  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.1

The Chair Moved and it was:-

RESOLVED

To defer consideration of this report to the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to be held on 24^th January, 2018.

The Committee received and noted a report that provided an update on the progress made in implementing the actions set out in the Mayor’s Transparency Protocol and the recommendations arising from the Overview and Scrutiny Transparency Commission report.  It was noted that as the work around these two initiatives had naturally converged and the report provided a combined picture of the current position on the Council’s overall work to drive forward the vision of a more open, accountable and transparent organisation.

It was also noted that whilst transparency and accountability remain a matter of real interest and concern to local people, the Annual Residents Survey (ARS) 2017/18 results had shown that 79% of residents trust the Council ‘a great deal’ or ‘a fair amount’ - up 7 points on last year, and well above the trust rating for councils nationally (59%). 59% also had agreed that the Council is ‘open and transparent about its activities’ - up 7 points on last year. 72% are satisfied with the way the Council runs things - close to last year’s rating and a historical high – and 78% felt the Council was doing a good job - up 6 points over the year. Despite this, the Council recognised that there is still further work to do, and remains committed to becoming a more open and transparent organisation.

The questions and comments from Members on the report may be summarised as follows:

The Committee:

• Commented that the available information on the web site needs to be fit for purpose and noted it was recognised that there is work to do on how the website can be navigated;
• Noted that regarding the Council welcomes petitions and recognises that they are one way in which people can let us know their concerns. The Council also accepts both paper and e-Petitions. Paper petitions are those prepared in the traditional way: a petition organiser creates a paper document that includes a proposed action;
• Noted regarding e-Petitions these are created, signed, and submitted entirely online. The petition organiser uses the Council’s website to create their petition and residents can then electronically add their name via the website to show their support of the action the petition organiser proposes;
• Commented that the petition process should be a symbol of an active community (i.e. a way of expressing an opinion for the public to put forward a view on an issue); and
• Commented that it wished to know about the use of alternate means to raise issues and including regular publications both digital and non-digital methods. Accordingly it was agreed that Andreas Christophorou; Divisional Director of Communications and Marketing should be invited to attend a future meeting to explain the Council’s Communications Strategy.

In conclusion, the Chair Moved and it was RESOLVED that the Committee would welcome the report and looked forward to receiving a presentation at a future meeting on the Council’s Communications Strategy.

The Committee will receive a briefing from each of the

Scrutiny Leads:

1. Councillor Clare Harrisson - Scrutiny Lead for Health, Adults & Community;

2. Councillor Danny Hassell - Scrutiny Lead for Children's Services;

3. Councillor Ayas Miah Scrutiny Lead for Governance;

4. Councillor Helal Uddin - Scrutiny Lead for Place; and

5. Councillor Andrew Wood - Scrutiny Lead for Resources.

(Time allocated – 5 minutes each)

The Committee received and noted the updates from the Scrutiny Leads which may be summarised as follows:

Councillor Clare Harrisson (Scrutiny Lead for Health, Adults & Community

• Noted in January that there would be an update on the recommendations of the Health Scrutiny Sub-Committee’s Review on Maternity Services which was undertaken in 2016.

Councillor Danny Hassell (Scrutiny Lead for Children's Services)

• Noted that there would be a Challenge Session on New Year Gangs and Serious Violence early in 2018.

Councillor Helal Uddin (Scrutiny Lead for Place)

• Noted that there would be a Fire Safety Review Session Presentation early in 2018 and at the January Sub-Committee a report following up from the Scrutiny Challenge Session on Homelessness.

Councillor Andrew Wood (Scrutiny Lead for Resources)

• Noted that at the last meeting the Sub-Committee had considered a number of reports including Event Fund Report for Applications Received Quarters 1 – 3, 2017-18; Affordable Housing Grant Programme 2016-19 Second Round and Mental Health User Led Grants Programme 2018 – 2020.

Councillor Dave Chesterton (Chair – Overview and Scrutiny Committee)

• Key Decision Notice – London Wide Pilot for Business Rates Retention: It was noted that as part of the report on the Medium Term Financial Strategy report to Cabinet on 19 September, the Mayor agreed in principle to join the London Business Rates Retention Scheme Pilot. Following conversations with London Councils it is now apparent that the final formal decision will need to be taken one Cabinet meeting earlier than expected (it will now be presented for final decision on 9 January). Although a general forward plan notice has been published for the Medium Term Financial Strategy Report that will contain this decision, as the decision is being taken separately to the rest of the report (which is only approved in draft form on 9 January) officers have decided that it is prudent and an aide to transparency, to publish a separate forward plan notice to highlight this specific decision. However, as the decision will now need to take place within 28 days, the notice will be published under general urgency provisions. Accordingly, the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny will monitor the progress of this report.

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

(Time allocated – 30 minutes).

The Committee noted that due to a Power Outage at John Onslow House reprographics offices it had not been possible to send out the Cabinet papers as intended.

Accordingly, copies of the agenda for Cabinet meeting were available at tonight’s meeting and that comments on the Cabinet agenda could be submitted up until 10:00 a.m. Friday 15^th December, 2017 for submission to Cabinet on the 19^th December, 2017.

Finally, the Committee was reminded that the Cabinet agenda was available online for inspection here

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

The Committee noted that Councillor Chesterton as Chair of Overview and Scrutiny had asked Mayor John Biggs and the Chief Executive Will Tuckley to attend tonight’s meeting to make a statement in relation to the recent reports in the press regarding Alpha Square, in particular the Times and the East London Advertiser.

In addition, it was noted that the Chair had sought and received the following advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officer.

• The case was referred to the Serious Fraud Office following advice from a Leading QC. The Leading QC also gave the Council advice about how it should handle the case.

• The Serious Fraud Office referred the matter to the National Crime Agency. The allegations made are of a serious nature and the Council must be mindful that this is still subject to a decision from the National Crime Agency and possible criminal prosecution.

• The Monitoring Officer had been in contact with the National Crime Agency and has been advised that it would be inappropriate for the Agency to comment at this stage of the matter.

The Committee noted therefore that it needed to be extremely cautious about any discussions on this issue i.e. No questions about individuals or speculation on the allegations.

Accordingly, the Committee noted that once the Mayor had made his statement there will then be an opportunity for the Committee to ask him and the Chief Executive questions. Although, given the advice of the Monitoring Officer the Committee was advised if the Chair was of the view that any questions or statements went beyond the limitations of the advice received, he would intervene.

The questions and comments from Members on the report may be summarised as follows:

The Committee:

• Noted that the Mayor had a limited role in planning process as an Executive Mayor and the Councillors who sit and determine the planning decisions operated under very clear guidance;
• Noted that the Commissioners were advised of the case as part of their regular briefing on Council Business and they had noted that it was not within their remit;
• Noted that this is a series of allegations and the reliability of the evidence is yet to be established;
• Noted that this is part of the Council’s efforts to develop confidence in people to lodge a complaint;
• Noted that any allegations need to be carefully investigated; and
• Noted that the Council has a comprehensive complaints system and the Local Government Ombudsman can order redress if there has been maladministration.

In conclusion, the Chair Moved and it was RESOLVED that the Committee would note the statement from the Mayor John Biggs.

The Committee noted that Councillor Ayas Miah (Scrutiny Lead Member for Governance) had led a Scrutiny Challenge Session on Thursday 7th December 2017 to look at the impact that Brexit could have on Tower Hamlets Council on. With particular reference to:

1. What impact could Brexit have on Tower Hamlets as a Local Authority particularly in relation our legal powers and responsibilities?
2. What are the likely challenges and opportunities of Brexit to our workforce, funding for core services and impact this may have on our local residents and regeneration schemes?
3. How could the Council ensure that we develop a comprehensive and proactive plan and approach to mitigating the impact of Brexit?
4. In preparing the Council for Brexit what should be our priority areas of contingency planning and how do we ensure that this is effectively communicated to all our internal and external stakeholders?

The questions and comments from the Scrutiny Challenge Session may be summarised as follows:

• There is a lot of uncertainty nationally and it is still not clear what kind of Brexit we will be facing. Until the Council has the full and final agreed Brexit arrangements in place, it will be difficult to determine the exact local impact;
• This is just the start of the Council’s deliberations about the impact of Brexit. For example, the Challenge Session was not able to discuss the impact of Brexit on Tower Hamlets as a place, such as economic stability and what impact this may have on the Borough’s attractiveness and competitiveness as a business destination and on communities that call Tower Hamlets home;
• Whilst these broader issues are already being considered by the Tower Hamlets Strategic Partnership, going forward it was felt that there will need to be further sessions for more detailed and specific discussions, bringing together a wider range of stakeholders; and
• The Council needs to be fully prepared for all eventualities (including a “no deal Brexit”) and constantly keep abreast of all key Brexit developments, by identifying and reviewing areas of potential impact. This will allow it to increase resilience and develop high level contingency plans that protect the Council’s revenue streams, workforce, local regeneration, infrastructure projects and community cohesion priorities.

In conclusion, the Chair Moved and it was:-

RESOLVED that the Committee:

1. Welcomed the update and looked forward to receiving more detailed and specific updates at future meetings; and
2. Agree to the proposal of Councillor Chesterton for a Cross Party Group on Brexit to be convened after the Local Government Elections in May. Although by March there should be a clear programme of activities dates times and speakers for this Group.

As agenda circulated contained no exempt/confidential business that required there to be a formal discussion and there was therefore no requirement to exclude the press and public.

Nil items

Nil items

No decisions of the Mayor in Cabinet in respect of exempt/ confidential reports on the agenda were ‘called in’.

Nil items

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

(Time allocated 15 minutes).

Nil items

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

Nil items