Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Room C1, 1st Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Contact: Angus Taylor, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4333 E-mail: angus.taylor@towerhamlets.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
COUNCILLOR ANN JACKSON (CHAIR) IN THE CHAIR
|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies for absence were received on behalf of: · Councillor Stephanie Eaton. · Canon Michael Ainsworth (Church of England Diocese Representative) · Louise Russell, Service Head Corporate Strategy and Equalities for whom Frances Jones, One Tower Hamlets Service Manager was deputising
Apologies for lateness were received on behalf of Councillor Fozol Miah.
Noted
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 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 Monitoring Officer.
Minutes: No declarations of interest were made.
|
|
UNRESTRICTED MINUTES To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the meetings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 3rd July 2012 and 24th July 2012.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair Moved and it was: -
Resolved
That the unrestricted minutes of the ordinary meetings of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, held on 3rd and 24th July 2012, be agreed as a correct record of the proceedings, and the Chair be authorised to sign them accordingly.
|
|
REQUESTS TO SUBMIT PETITIONS To receive any petitions (to be notified at the meeting).
Minutes: There were no petitions.
|
|
UNRESTRICTED REPORTS 'CALLED IN' No decisions of the Mayor in Cabinet (25th July 2012) in respect of unrestricted reports on the agenda were ‘called in’.
Minutes: Nodecisions of the Mayor in Cabinet on 25th July 2012 had been “called in”.
|
|
UNRESTRICTED REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
To consider and comment on the information contained in the report: a summary of enforcement activity for the 2011/2012 financial year, an analysis of whether or not such action is consistent with the five key principles of enforcement, and an examination of whether the Enforcement Policy requires revision.
Additional documents:
Minutes: David Galpin, Head of Legal Services - Community, introduced, and highlighted key points, in the report which provided: · A summary of enforcement activity for the 2011/2012 financial year. · An analysis of whether or not such action was consistent with the five key principles of the Council’s Enforcement Policy and whether the policy required consequent revision. · Details of new developments with implications for policy revision.
A discussion followed which focused on the following points:- · The report detailed much hard work, but did not contain clear measures for success and an examination of the value of the work undertaken was needed. The Committee considered that a dashboard or headline analysis would be helpful. Mr Galpin responded that each directorate had its own enforcement policy/ criteria for success, and more information could be provided in future. · The Council’s approach to enforcement must be proportional and its approach to enforcement for prostitution was welcomed. The approach also needed tailoring to take account of individual needs, and assurance was sought and given on enforcement for those with mental capacity issues. · Clarification was sought and given regarding criminal enforcement activity in relation to illegal sub-letting of Council owned housing. Further information to be provided. · The number of noise abatement notices issued by THEOs appeared low compared to the number of Fixed Penalty Notices, when controlling noise pollution was important. Mr Galpin responded that THEOs had only recently assumed responsibility for noise and this enforcement activity was expected to grow. · Further information requested in relation to the health and safety enforcement activity detailed at paras 4.27 to 4.30 of the report. · An explanation was lacking as to why warning letters were sent to landlords on housing safety or enforcement notices issued for statutory nuisances. Further information to be provided on what the Council was targeting. · The number of prosecutions for elections appeared low given the extent of media coverage on reportedly significant levels of electoral fraud in Tower Hamlets. Mr Galpin responded that such cases were referred to the Police for investigation. Further information on referral numbers and Police process requested. · It would be helpful if the social impact of enforcement activity was analysed/ summarised. · More proactive work was needed with the London Muslim Centre to raise awareness of the law on unlawful street trading. · Magistrates should be included in any initiatives to raise awareness given a communications breakdown on prostitution. · Thought needed on how to raise the awareness of drunks of the impact of their behaviour on the community. · Further information on Police enforcement activity in relation to prostitute customers requested, as significant change could be achieved by tackling those buying.
The Chair Moved and it was :-
Resolved
That the contents of the report be noted.
Action by: David Galpin, Head of Legal Services - Community |
|
Complaints and Information Annual Report To consider and comment on the information contained in the report in relation to the volume of complaints/ information requests received by the Council in the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012, the outcomes of those cases and the standard of performance in dealing with them.
Additional documents: Minutes: Tabled papers, copies of which would be interleaved with the minutes: The Annual Review Letter’ of the Local Government Ombudsman and An addendum sheet to Appendix 1 of the report.
David Galpin, Head of Legal Services - Community, introduced, and highlighted key points, in the report which provided details of the volume of complaints and information requests received by the Council in the period 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012, the outcomes of those cases and the standard of performance in dealing with them.
A discussion followed which focused on the following points:- · Increased numbers of assessment requests due to the launch of the new “Customer Journey” in Adult Social Care had been predictable. The assessment of support plans often involved difficult decisions, and it was concerning that there was insufficient capacity to deliver these without delay, given the impact on individuals. Further information requested on why effective planning for change was not done. · A significant rise in volumes of Adult Social Care complaints, particularly amongst elders and the explanation that this was due to a Local Government Ombudsman campaign targeting elders. It was important for the Council to identify how well it was performing in relation to the provision of domiciliary care, by examining complaints. A determination was needed to identify if the rise in complaints was a national or local issue. Mr Galpin to look into what was done to examine the cause of complaints. · Concern that 8 Stage 3 repairs-based complaints had been upheld, as complaints about THH had gone down the previous year. Also the number of Stage 3 complaints warranting compensation had dropped but the value of compensation had risen significantly. Attention was needed on this if THH was underperforming in terms of repairs. · Concern that Stage 3 complaints related to young people/ learning and CLC recycling/ refuse collection had increased with complaints for other services down. This was also at odds with the customer satisfaction index and needed explanation. Mr Galpin responded that if reasons for increases/ decreases could be determined, this was detailed, and it was part of ongoing work to spot and mitigate trends. · Complaint response times for Children Schools & Families seemed very poor with average response times of 71 and 52 days. Two children’s social care complaints had been answered outside the timescale and the delay could be critical for those children. Mr Galpin responded that the lengthy response times were due to the statutory process and requirement for the Council to use a non-Council person people to oversee the investigation. However, there was room for improvement. · Concern over a 33% increase in stage 1 complaints, with 25% upheld, for Children Looked After, also the increase in complaints at stage 2 and at Review Panel. The increase was substantial and an explanation lacking, when it was known that the Council had made significant efforts over recent years to improve in this area. Nor were mitigating steps outlined. Childrens Social Care to be requested to examine this. · Clarification sought if ... view the full minutes text for item 6.2 |
|
To receive a report on the financial position of the Council at the end of Quarter 1 compared to Budget, and service performance against targets.
Additional documents:
Minutes: The Chair welcomed Councillor Alibor Choudhury, Cabinet Member for Resources. He, together with Alan Finch, Service Head Financial Services Risk and Accountability, introduced and highlighted key points in the monitoring report which detailed the financial position of the Council at the end of Quarter 1 2012/13 compared to budget, and service performance against targets. Kevin Kewin, Service Manager Strategy Policy & Performance was also in attendance for this item.
A discussion followed which focused on the following points:- · Clarification sought and given with reference to delays in delivery of Decent Homes/ associated slippage in the Capital Programme and the explanation that this was due to changes in the procurement process. · Noted that the target for the percentage of senior staff that were women had been missed and an explanation and indication of mitigating steps was lacking. Progress on WRC appeared not to extend to women. Councillor Choudhury responded that work was underway to address this. Mr Kewin added that as staff turnover was low it was difficult to make quick progress, but HR initiatives were now in place to support improvement. · Concern that performance was lower than expected for carers receiving a needs assessment/ review, as this would affect the resilience of the community, and no mitigating steps were outlined. Mr Kewin responded that a number of commissioned providers had yet to submit their datasets, which deflated the outturn; better figures were expected in Quarter 2. · Written clarification requested on the comment that it was anticipated that resources allocated for the Learning Disability Service would not be required. Would the resources remain available for future contractors? Mr Finch responded that the directorate was indicating here that it would retain the resources until it knew the needs of new providers. · Concern expressed that targets on the Council’s work programme, particularly relating to NEETs had been missed. Clarification was sought as to the overall target and how much had been achieved. Councillor Choudhury responded that the position was unclear due to Government review of its contractor. Requested that further information be provided at the next OSC. · If a significant variance against budget or performance targets was reported it would be helpful to Members if there was an associated explanation. Also that standard explanations were not helpful. Mr Finch to action. · Clarification was sought and given regarding the purpose of the reported virement in the 2012/13 Control Budget relating to Future Sourcing and where the substantial saving associated with Future Sourcing was reported. · Clarification was sought regarding the reported risk in achieving the income target for Communications. Communications to be asked for an explanation of the variance and this to be reported to the next OSC. · Clarification was sought, with reference to the programme of works in place to reduce the amount of non-decent housing stock by 2015, as to the cost of maintaining DH standard stock after 2015. Councillor Choudhury responded that it was hoped that expenditure would be less than previously forecast given limited HRA resources. Exact figures to ... view the full minutes text for item 6.3 |
|
Scrutiny Review Update: Supporting New Communities, Case Study of the Somali Community To receive a presentation on progress since completion of the review.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Frances Jones, One Tower Hamlets Service Manager, and Sarah Barr, Senior SPP Officer, gave a detailed Powerpoint presentation in addition to the written report. The slides were also Tabled, a copy of which would be interleaved with the minutes.
The new methodology of a presentation and discussion provided an update on implementation of the original review recommendations, as with previous tracking reports; but also set out changes in context, looked at learning from the review, and gave a mechanism for observations to contribute to ongoing policy work through the refresh of the Race Equality Scheme and for capture in the end of year review.
Undertanding Needs: Data Key points · Much work done since the review to use existing data better: Published briefings, Census data and anecdotal data from Praxis and local councillors. · Analysis of NI number data from the DWP reinforced early Census returns showing that immigration was an ongoing challenge for the borough, although less so for the Somali community. Also there was great population churn particularly amongst single people of working age. This was likely to increase given Government welfare reforms. · It would be important to be nimble in using the learning to improve service delivery.
Discussion focused on the following points: · Consideration that partnership working was important in this area and there should be a corporate target for sharing data with RSLs other than THH, advocacy providers and other voluntary sector organisations who had significant amounts of data.
Employment Key points · Work was continuing to identify and address specific inequalities for different groups, gaps in services and barriers to work in accord with 2011 Employment Strategy commitment. · Research commissioned by the Council had led the Women and Worklessness programme, done in partnership with Skillsmatch, to set up a project targeting worklessness amongst Somali and Bangladeshi women. Skillsmatch placed 600 local people into sustained employment 46% of whom were Bangladeshi. · Some employers/ roles introduced unnecessary barriers to employment and work with the Employment Board to challenge employers to be as flexible as possible was continuing.
Discussion focused on the following points: · Recommendation 5 of the Review: welcome packs for new communities should include reference to the role of ward councillors and how to access them. More widely distributed information on how to access the decision makers and influence change was needed. · With reference to reported success of Skillsmatch in securing work for BME residents a breakdown by age, gender, ethnicity showing which groups had been more or less successful and their relationship to the labour market (long term residents/ recent arrivals to UK) was requested. · To succeed in placing unemployed people in work employers needed to be willing to provide training but instead sought trained/ skilled staff. Ms Jones agreed that employers had not been included fully in the discussion; this would be fed back to the Enterprise Board, comprised mostly of employers, as it could play a more proactive role.
Advocacy Services Key points
The mapping of advocacy services in 2011 had ... view the full minutes text for item 6.4 |
|
To note revised OSC membership, consider appointment of a Lead Scrutiny Member for the Communities, Localities & Culture, note the current position in relation to the co-option of representatives in respect of education matters, note and endorse the requested revision to membership of the HSP for the remainder of the Municipal Year 2012/13 and to note the final current membership of the HSP.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Angus Taylor, Principal Committee Officer, introduced the report and summarised the key points it contained.
Councillor Fozol Miah advised that, in view of his councillor surgery commitments, he needed more time to consider taking up the appointment as Scrutiny Lead Member for Communities Localities & Culture, given that the OSC was likely to make such an offer because he remained the only member of the OSC without a Scrutiny Lead portfolio. He also clarified that Councillor Harun Miah, the other member of the Respect Group, had indicated that he was also unable to take up the portfolio.
The Chair commented that if members of the Respect Group were unable to take up the appointment by the date of the next OSC meeting, a general invitation for nominations would be made.
Councillor Rachael Saunders, Chair of the Health Scrutiny Panel, informed the OSC that the HSP had briefly discussed the potential for co-options to its membership, and was continuing to review the position and examine suitable candidates.
The Chair Moved and it was: -
Resolved
1. That the revised Membership of the OSC, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, be noted;
2. That consideration of an appointment, from amongst its membership, of a Lead Scrutiny Member for the Communities, Localities & Culture portfoliofor the remainder of the Municipal Year 2012/13 be deferred to the next OSC meeting;
3. That the current position in relation to the co-option of representatives in respect of education matters, as set out at paragraphs 4.1 to 4.3 and Appendix 1 of the report, be noted; and
4. That the requested revision to Labour Group representation on the HSP for the remainder of the Municipal Year 2012/13 be noted and endorsed. That the subsequent final current membership of the HSP, as set out in Appendix 4 to the report, be noted.
Action by: Angus Taylor, Principal Committee Officer |
|
VERBAL UPDATES FROM SCRUTINY LEADS (Time allocated – 5 minutes each) Minutes: The Chair commented that work was underway to scope out the main elements of the OSC Scrutiny Work Programme and appointments with Officers to take this work forward were being made.
Councillor Tim Archer, commented that he had undertaken a desktop review of publicly available information on new regulations which he understood would provide councillors with strengthened powers to scrutinise documents associated with decisions under Executive powers, and consequently sought clarification of this.
David Galpin, Head of Legal Services - Community, responded that new regulations governing public access to meetings, and information relating to executive decisions would come into effect on 10 September 2012. These were unexpected and had not been the subject of any consultation. Senior Officers were to meet on 5 September to examine the implications for Executive decision making at LB Tower Hamlets.
The Chair Moved and it was: -
Resolved
!. That the verbal update be noted; and
2. That a briefing on new regulations governing public access to meetings/ information relating to executive decisions and their implications for Executive decision making at LB Tower Hamlets be presented to the next meeting of the OSC. Action by: David Galpin, Head of Legal Services - Community |
|
PRE-DECISION SCRUTINY OF UNRESTRICTED CABINET PAPERS To consider and agree pre-decision scrutiny questions/comments to be presented to Cabinet.
(Time allocated – 30 minutes). Minutes: No pre-decision questions submitted to Mayor in Cabinet [5September 2012].
|
|
ANY OTHER UNRESTRICTED BUSINESS WHICH THE CHAIR CONSIDERS TO BE URGENT To consider any other unrestricted business that the Chair considers to be urgent. Minutes: Sarah Barr informed the OSC of forthcoming Centre for Public Scrutiny training sessions, including one on 17 October at the LB of Westminster (those wishing to attending asked to contact Sarah). An in-house briefing for all councillors on Government welfare reforms on 23 October.
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC In view of the contents of the remaining items on the agenda the Committee is recommended to adopt the following motion:
“That, under the provisions of Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting for the consideration of the Section Two business on the grounds that it contains information defined as Exempt in Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972.”
EXEMPT/CONFIDENTIAL SECTION (Pink Papers)
The exempt committee papers in the agenda will contain information, which is commercially, legally or personally sensitive and should not be divulged to third parties. If you do not wish to retain these papers after the meeting, please hand them to the Committee Officer present. Minutes: The agenda circulated contained no exempt/ confidential business and there was therefore no requirement to exclude the press and public to allow for its consideration.
|
|
EXEMPT/ CONFIDENTIAL MINUTES Nil items. Minutes: Nil items.
|
|
EXEMPT/ CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS 'CALLED IN' No decisions of the Mayor in Cabinet (25th July 2012) in respect of exempt/ confidential reports on the agenda were ‘called in’.
Minutes: Nil items.
|
|
PRE-DECISION SCRUTINY OF EXEMPT/ CONFIDENTIAL CABINET PAPERS To consider and agree pre-decision scrutiny questions/comments to be presented to Cabinet.
(Time allocated 15 minutes). Minutes: Nil items.
|
|
ANY OTHER EXEMPT/ CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS THAT THE CHAIR CONSIDERS URGENT To consider any other exempt/ confidential business that the Chair considers to be urgent. Minutes: Nil items.
|