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 MOTIN UZ ZAMAN (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 (Scrutiny Lead Resources). · Councillor Sirajul Islam (Mental Health and Housing Challenge Session Co-Lead Member/ Chair) · David Galpin (Head of Legal Services - Community) for whom Agnes Adrienne (Team Leader Enforcement & Litigation, Legal Services, Chief Executive’s) was deputising.
· Apologies for lateness were received on behalf of Councillors Rachael Saunders (Vice-Chair and Scrutiny Lead Adults Health & Wellbeing), and Abdul Ullah (Scrutiny Lead Development & Renewal).
Noted
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTEREST PDF 56 KB 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 Disclosable Pecuniary Interest or other declarations of interest were made.
|
|
UNRESTRICTED MINUTES PDF 163 KB To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 4th June 2013.
Minutes: Matter Arising
The Chair: · Informed OSC members that at the last OSC meeting he had indicated that he would be inviting the Mayor to attend the next OSC meeting [2nd July], for the first of a series of ‘spotlight sessions’ during the year ahead. This spotlight was intended to focus on the challenges and opportunities the Mayor foresaw for delivery of improved quality of life for local people in the year ahead. The Chair had extended the invitation at Cabinet on 5th June and formalised this in a subsequent letter. The Mayor had declined the invitation, because of prior commitments and therefore with OSC agreement he intended to invite the Mayor to the next OSC meeting [23rd July} for the spotlight session. · Emphasised the significant contribution Scrutiny could make in shaping services to improve outcomes for local people, and the importance of engaging with the Mayor/ Cabinet to achieve this; and that the spotlight session was intended to be an element of this engagement.
The Chair Moved and it was:-
Resolved
That the unrestricted minutes of the ordinary meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, held on 4th June 2013, be agreed as a correct record of the proceedings, and the Chair be authorised to sign them accordingly.
Action by: Angus Taylor (Principal Committee Officer, Democratic Services, CE’s)
|
|
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 (5th June 2013) in respect of unrestricted reports on the agenda were ‘called in’.
Minutes: The clerk informed OSC members that: · No decisions of the Mayor in Cabinet on 5th June 2013 had been “called in”. · There has been one “Call In” of a recent decision of the Mayor outside Cabinet taken under executive powers. Although this met the criteria in the Council’s Constitution, the Assistant Chief Executive (Legal) had determined that it did not require urgent consideration and would be considered at the next OSC meeting to be held on 23rd July 2013.
|
|
UNRESTRICTED REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
Removing Barriers to Youth Employment - Report of the Scrutiny Working Group PDF 95 KB To agree the report and recommendations arising from the Scrutiny Review.
Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Ann Jackson, Lead Member/ Chair of the Scrutiny Working Group: Removing Barriers to Youth Employment, introduced and highlighted key points in the SWG report, which set out the rationale and objectives, methodology, key findings and recommendations of the scrutiny review. The following Officers were also in attendance to answer questions from the OSC. · Anne Canning, Interim Corporate Director, Education Social Care and Wellbeing. · Di Warne, Interim Service Head Learning & Achievement, ESCW. · Steve Grocott, Head of Careers Service, ESCW. · Andy Scott, Interim Service Head Economic Development, D&R.
The following points were highlighted by Councillor Jackson: · Background to identification of this as a potential area for review including: o Awareness of the importance of employment, given the impact of Government welfare reforms, which combined with continuing recession made securing employment more difficult for young people in particular, because of their need of job specific experience, skills and qualifications to allow them to compete with others and get on a career ladder. o Awareness that Government has not intervened in the UK job market, relying instead on encouraging corporate and financial growth to bring employment, combined with a belief that more serious consideration was needed on how to get young people ready for work. A belief also that young people needed additional individual support and guidance to achieve this, as they found themselves in a position of understanding and choosing the best direction and were not equipped to do so. Consideration that the Council could adopt a more custodial approach with partners to ensure the best outcomes for young people. o Improving employment opportunities for young people in the borough was a Council and Mayoral priority, and it was important to ensure resources in this area were applied efficiently/ effectively and delivery/ outcomes were optimised. · Review Objective: To investigate how the Council and its partners could improve the support provided to young people to become work-ready, and help remove barriers to employment. · Key areas for review: o The demand for apprenticeships by young people. o The supply of good quality apprenticeships and how this can be stimulated. o Supporting young people to access opportunities and be competitive in the labour market: how could the Council add value to this agenda? · Key Findings including: o Information: Much Government and Council activity focused on securing post 16 education/ employment for young people, but partnership working was not joined up. There was a significant opportunity to improve the quality and accessibility of information available for young people, to help them understand what happened after school: how to look for work, the offer available to them from the Council and other providers to support this, also information on benefits, housing and training. Easy to understand web based menu driven information was needed. o Mentoring: A mentoring resource needed to be available to young people. With mentor encouragement they could gain the insight needed to on education/ training/ careers available to them, consider their options, gain confidence/ motivation and weather problems that faced them. ... view the full minutes text for item 6.1 |
|
To agree the report and recommendations arising from the Scrutiny Review.
Minutes: Councillor Amy Whitelock, Scrutiny Lead Member Children, Schools & Families 2012/13 and 2013/14 and Lead Member/ Chair Scrutiny Working Group: Post 16 Educational Attainment in Tower Hamlets, introduced and highlighted key points in the SWG report, which set out the context/ rationale for the review, methodology and analysis of data undertaken, key findings and recommendations. The following Officers were also in attendance to answer questions from the OSC. · Anne Canning, Interim Corporate Director Education Social Care and Wellbeing. · Di Warne, Interim Service Head Learning & Achievement, ESCW. · Tim Williams, Post 16 Development Officer, ESCW.
The following points were highlighted by Councillor Whitelock: · Background to identification of this as a potential area for review including: o A discussion with other Councillors had noted significant that the progress in GCSE attainment appeared not to have been matched by post-16 results in Tower Hamlets. o Improving performance for post-16 attainment was a Council and Mayoral priority and therefore underperformance merited further investigation. o The ESCW directorate had recently undertaken an analysis of post 16 attainment in LBTH so this provided a good starting point for a review. · Key Findings: o Analysis of the data showed that at the higher grades A*-B, LBTH fell well below the national average, with students achieving As at GCSE tending to underperform at A Level. It was vital that higher ability students also performed well post-16, as not doing so impacted on subsequent life choices and fulfilling their potential. o The range of subjects and destinations chosen for higher education was limited, with the vast majority opting to stay in London. Different types of universities might be more appropriate to certain career objectives, and it was important that all students were encouraged to think broadly and explore different options for their futures, and that a range of information was available to them to allow this. o The evidence also suggested that parental perceptions were that sixth form colleges in Tower Hamlets were not as good as in Islington, Camden and elsewhere. The review had however found good practice in Tower Hamlets such as Central Foundation School, where a separate sixth form environment had been created and the Headteacher stretched students’ horizons. o The reasons for the findings were found to be complex but included: ØThe challenge of the jump between GCSE and A Level with much support available to students at the GCSE but A level requiring more independent study skills. ØStudents choosing subjects they felt they ought to choose, rather than those suited to their skills set, resulting in not performing well. ØThe difficulties in navigating a complex post-16 landscape. · The review had found much good practice in and out of the borough eg Hackney and Camden, and this had informed the recommendations. The themed groups of recommendations were signposted. · Formally thanking all those who had contributed to the review.
A discussion followed which focused on clarification being sought and given on the following points:- · Whether the review had examined governance standards and the ... view the full minutes text for item 6.2 |
|
Mental Health and Housing - Report of the Scrutiny Challenge Session PDF 136 KB To agree the report and recommendations arising from the Scrutiny Challenge Session.
Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Rachael Saunders, Scrutiny Lead Member Adults Health and Wellbeing 2012/13 and 2013/14 and Co-Lead Member/ Co-Chair Scrutiny Challenge Session: Mental Health and Housing, introduced and highlighted key points in the SCS report, which set out the context/ rationale, objectives, and key findings/ recommendations of the challenge session. Colin Cormack, Service Head Housing Options, Development & Renewal, was also in attendance to answer questions from the OSC.
The following points were highlighted by Councillor Saunders: · Background to identification of this as a potential area for review: a number of Councillors had felt that in setting the criteria to award priority for housing on medical grounds the focus was more on physical health issues rather than mental health issues, and there was a sense that in the decision making process those with mental health conditions did not manage to obtain housing priority so easily. · Key Findings including: o Those with the most severe mental health conditions were supported by the current system eg dedicated accommodation and supported living arrangements, but a significant number of people with more subtle mental health conditions were not necessarily awarded the priority and housing they deserved. Therefore current medical priority award criteria for those people with a mental health condition needed review and revision. o The health prioritisation form was focused on questions regarding physical functioning and interaction with physical environment. There was now a need to progress the revision of the form to enable people to articulate any mental health problems and link mental health to housing need. This would also ensure more information was obtained to inform decision making on health prioritisation; o Medical professionals that had tried to help people with mental health issues in housing need had not understood how the housing system worked, and Cabinet had therefore decided that Officers should exercise the judgement on awarding housing priority. The Challenge Session had considered that Officers needed to be better equipped to make informed and confident judgements/ decisions about people with mental health problems and whether they should be awarded medical priority for housing, and this required additional and regular mental health specific training,
Colin Cormack, Service Head Housing Options, Development & Renewal: · Acknowledged that the Challenge Session had highlighted that those suffering a mental health condition found the housing assessment process much more challenging than those with a physical health condition. Also that the health prioritisation form was geared towards physical ill health not mental ill health. Advised that whilst the mechanism for prioritising mental conditions needed improvement, it would advantage nobody if all this resulted in was many more people getting a higher priority, in the context of the finite housing available, as the prioritisation process was a mechanism to decide who did or did not get assistance. · Suggested that Recommendations 1 and 2 be reversed, as it was appropriate for the Housing Options Service to work with colleagues and partners who delivered support to those with mental health conditions on reviewing the medical priority award criteria, before reviewing and revising ... view the full minutes text for item 6.3 |
|
To receive a report on the financial position of the Council at the end of Quarter 4 2012/13 compared to Budget, and service performance against targets.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Councillor Alibor Choudhury, Cabinet Member for Resources, introduced, and highlighted key points, in the monitoring report which detailed the financial position of the Council at the end of 2012/13 compared to budget, and service performance against targets. Chris Holme, Acting Corporate Director Resources, and Louise Russell, Service Head Corporate Strategy and Equality, were also in attendance for this item.
A discussion followed which focused on clarification being sought and given on the following points:- · In response to a request from the Chair, areas of underperformance were also outlined:
· The reported positive direction of travel for key poverty indicators: JSA Claimant Rate and Proportion of Children in Poverty; in the context that as more wealthy people moved into the borough there would be improved poverty indicators without any intervention being necessary. The OSC requested a numerical breakdown rather than percentages. Louise Russell undertook to provide a written response to all OSC members. · The reported variance in the Communications Budget where 12/13 outturn was over 10 per cent more than the latest 12/13 budget and where 12/13 outturn was almost £1 million more than the original 12/13 budget. In general terms there was more to communicate to people. A detailed explanation would be provided in writing to OSC members in a day or two. The Chair re-iterated the importance of Officers being properly briefed and able to provide the answers to matters raised by the OSC in order that it could fulfil its scrutiny remit effectively. · Postponement of development and implementation of the Mayor’s Employment and Enterprise Board (2 years). Further work was needed to engage stakeholders and ensure a proper Board and plan for delivery. Councillor Choudhury agreed to provide a timescale and action plan for implementation requested by the OSC.
The Chair Moved and it was:-
Resolved
1. That the Council’s financial performance compared to budget for 2012/13, as detailed in Sections 3 to 6 and Appendices 1-4 of the report, be noted;
2. That the proposed transfers to reserves, as detailed in Appendix 5 of the report, be noted; and
3. That the 2012/13 year end performance for strategic measures and Strategic Plan activities, as set out in Sections 7 and 8 and detailed in Appendices 6 &7 of the report, be noted.
Action by: Chris Holme, Acting Corporate Director Resources Louise Russell, Service Head Corporate Strategy and Equalities
|
|
Development of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Work Programme 2013/14 (Oral Report) An OSC Work Programme Development Session is scheduled to take place on Monday 24th June to discuss the Committee’s work programme for 2013/14. The OSC will receive an oral report and presentation on outline ideas for the OSC Work Programme.
Minutes: Ms Louise Russell, Service Head Corporate Strategy & Equality, gave a detailed PowerPoint presentation on the development of the OSC Work Programme in 2013/14 which focused on the following points: · Progress to Date:
· Suggested Areas for Scrutiny were outlined. · Analysis of potential scrutiny topics grouped topics by theme:
ØRight to Buy Ø2 year old provision
ØCareer development for disabled staff ØSchool Spaces
ØIntegration of health and social care ØResident engagement in the budget process
· Next Step: Corporate Strategy & Equality would continue to work with Scrutiny Leads and Officers on resource commitment, and finalise the Work Programme for presentation to OSC on 23rd July.
A discussion followed focused on the following points: · The Chair thanked Louise Russell and her Officer team for the development session and formulation of the Work Programme. The programme was ambitious and frontloaded to take account of Member activity in the run up to Council elections in 2014. · Councillor Helal Uddin commented that he had not attended the work programme development session and consequently the draft OSC Work Programme did not contain potential areas for scrutiny relating to his portfolio of Communities Localities and Culture. It was agreed that Councillor Uddin should forward any suggestions to Louise Russell, Service Head Corporate Strategy & Equality, and the Chair for them to consider inclusion in the finalised Work Programme to be presented to OSC on 23rd July. · Councillor Saunders considered that the OSC meeting on 1st October was over-programmed, and suggested that the focus on integration of health and social care be included in the Health Scrutiny Panel work programme instead, with all OSC members invited to the appropriate HSP meeting. · Councillor Whitelock considered that even with the suggested transfer of business, the OSC meeting on 1st October remained over-programmed: It was suggested that the SEN session be a Lead Member Briefing to reduce the items for the October meeting. · Councillor Ullah considered that it would be more appropriate for the Community Safety Spotlight and Cabinet Member with portfolio to attend the October OSC as there was normally a spike in community safety issues around Guy Fawkes night (5th November) and it would be helpful to reach an understanding of preparations for that by the Council and its partners. The Chair responded that he would consider that but the Work Programme had been constructed so Cabinet Member attendance was not too onerous.
The Chair Moved and it was:-
Resolved
1. That the position update contained in the oral report/ presentation be noted.
2. That the draft 2013/14 OSC Work Programme be finalised, taking account of OSC member suggestions if possible and after consultation with the Chair, ... view the full minutes text for item 6.5 |
|
PRE-DECISION SCRUTINY OF UNRESTRICTED CABINET PAPERS To consider and agree pre-decision scrutiny questions/comments to be presented to Cabinet.
Minutes: No pre-decision questions submitted to the Mayor in Cabinet [03 July 2013].
|
|
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: The Chair commented that the role/ function of Scrutiny was crucial and it was essential that OSC meetings were facilitated through appropriate provision of equipment, and the Executive was responsible for ensuring this. In this context the Chair noted that microphones had not been provided and the Clerk had been advised that day that they were broken; accordingly he requested that an explanation be provided as to why the microphones were not available and their repair had not been prioritised.
Action by: Angus Taylor (Principal Committee Officer, Democratic Services, CE’s) Jean Waterson (East India Dock Manager, Facilities Management)
|
|
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.
SUMMARY OF EXEMPT PROCEEDINGS
|
|
EXEMPT/ CONFIDENTIAL MINUTES Nil items.
Minutes: Nil items.
|
|
EXEMPT/ CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS 'CALLED IN' No decisions of the Mayor in Cabinet (5th June 2013) 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.
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.
|