There were none.

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

There were no Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests.

To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the meeting held on 6^th November 2024.

The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed and approved as a correct record.  

Consideration of any written comments received from members of the public in relation to any of the reports on the agenda.

[Any submissions should be sent to the clerk listed on the agenda front page by 5pm the day before the meeting]

There were none.

To note for information individual decisions relating to the award of grants that have been taken by the Mayor the last meeting.

There were none.

Keith Stanger, Assistant Director Community Safety presented the report on that seeks agreement for the renewal of the S.92 partnership agreement.

Members made the following comments:

•         The sub-committee agreed on the importance of keeping the police presence within the borough.

•         How often are these police officers pulled away from borough duties for other duties across the capital? Officers stated that the amount of extractions has dropped and agreed to provide the Executive with a briefing on the impact on extractions.

•         Are any other councils in an agreement like this? And what would the benchmarking be across the capital? Officers stated Tower Hamlets is unique in this agreement, as most councils pulled out due to funding, while the police will not start new agreements of this nature. Officers detailed the level of monitoring on the police within the borough.

DECISION:

1.    Notes the historical fragmentation of the service offer and the new integrated model Discuss and agree the consolidated Key Performance Indicators at Appendix B in the report submitted.

2.    Authorises the Corporate Director Communities in consultation with the Mayor to agree the renewal of the S.92 Agreement with the MPS (Mayors Office for Policing And Crime) and instructs the execution of all necessary and appropriate documentation to give effect to the recommendations in this report.

REASONS FOR THE DECISIONS:

1.    The council has funded a cohort of additional police officers since 2015. This is a mayoral priority. It aims to provide an additional, enhanced, visible police presence and a flexible response to tackle crime, support the work of Tower Hamlets Enforcement Officers in delivering the mayor’s and resident’s priorities relating to crime and disorder.

2.    The S.92 Agreement with the Metropolitan Police (MPS) requires renewal. It is the grant agreement with the MPS that requires approval for 2024 to 2026. The funding for all the officers is currently in place as part of existing budgets.

Afazul Hoque, Head of Corporate Strategy & Policy, provided the Committee with an update on the council funded Mayor’s Community Grants Programme (MCGP) for the voluntary and community sector for the period July – September 2024, including an overview of activities and performance for the five themes of the programme.

DECISION:

1.    Notes the performance of the Mayor’s Community Grants Programme for July – September 2024, as set out in 3.3 and 3.4 and Appendices 3.1 – 3.5 in the report submitted.

REASONS FOR THE DECISIONS:

1.    The Grants Determination Sub Committee (GDSC) Terms of Reference sets out the need to provide performance reporting to the Committee.

2.    Regular performance updates ensure that the MCGP themes and individual projects are on track to achieve the targeted outcomes. Any issues that arise can be addressed and appropriate remedial actions agreed. Where necessary, this could include the reduction, withdrawal or reallocation of funds to ensure that the overall Programme is making the most effective use of resources and maximising the potential achievement of agreed aims and objectives.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS:

1.    Information relating to various aspects of project and monitoring activity is contained within the report to provide Grants Determination Sub-Committee (GDSC) with an overall understanding of how projects and organisations have performed against the key elements of their Funding Agreements. This is a constitutional obligation.

2.    GDSC could request further information.

None.