Agenda, decisions and minutes

[Note:  The agenda order was varied to allow items of public interest to be taken prior to the remainder of the agenda. The agenda order of the substantive items was as follows: item 12 – Transformation of Day Services, item 15 –Concessionary Travel, item 10 – School Organisation, item 11 – West London Independent Fostering Agency Framework Tender, item 14 – Discretionary Housing Payment, item 13 – Adoption of Harrow’s Community Infrastructure Levy,  and  items 16/17 – Strategic Performance Report / Treasury Management Strategy.

In addition, an announcement was made by the Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families in relation to the ‘good news’ received on the proposed School Expansion Programme.  As it was customary for the minutes to show the formal business first, followed by any Recommendations to Council prior to the recording of general decisions being made by Cabinet, the minutes are set out in that order.]

The Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families was proud to announce that the Department for Education had agreed to fund the expansion of 15 schools in Harrow, including a Special Educational Needs (SEN) Unit at Harrow College.  She added that this was in addition to the nine schools that had already been approved for expansion.

The Portfolio Holder added that the expansion would enable the Council to provide 3,000 additional school places by 2015 to educate the increasing number of young people in Harrow’s primary schools, including children with SEN in specialist schools together with specialist provision in mainstream schools.  The Portfolio Holder thanked school staff and officers in the Children and Families Directorate who had been involved in submitting compelling bids to the Department of Education.  The expansion would also help enrich and enhance the lives and opportunities of Harrow’s children.

The Leader of the Council also thanked the Corporate Director of Children and Families and Councillors for their support.

To receive apologies for absence (if any).

An apology for lateness was received on behalf of Councillor Susan Hall, who had been delayed at another meeting.

To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary or non pecuniary interests arising from business to be transacted at this meeting from:

(a)               all Members of the Cabinet; and

(b)               all other Members present.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

Agenda Item 10 – School Organisation

During consideration of this item and upon the mention of Vaughan School, Councillor William Stoodley declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was the Chairman of the Planning Committee which had determined the recent planning application for the site.  He would leave the room if the discussion became specific to Vaughan School.

Agenda Item 13 - Adoption of Harrow’s Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

On behalf of Councillor Hall who had been delayed at a meeting, it was declared that she owned a business in Harrow and Wealdstone.  She remained in the room to ask questions on the matter.

Agenda Item 15 – Concessionary Travel – Changes to the Taxi Card Scheme

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane declared a non-pecuniary interest in that he was employed by London Councils Limited which administered the Taxi Card Scheme.  He would remain in the room to ask questions on this matter.

That the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 20 June 2013 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That, subject to the following amendment, the minutes of the meeting held on 20 June 2013, be taken as read and signed as a correct record:

Minute 652, Councillor Question 1, Page 9 of the agenda, last word of line 4 to read ‘reserves’ instead of ‘service’. 

To receive any petitions submitted by members of the public or Councillors.

(1)               Taxicards - Petition

Angela Dias, Harrow Association of Disabled people, presented a petition signed by 363 people with the following terms of reference:

“We, the undersigned, who are committed to the rights of disabled people to participate fully in society, call on Harrow Council to restore the taxicard allowance to 104 journeys per year for everyone who is assessed to need a taxicard.”

RESOLVED:  That the petition be received and considered with agenda item 15, Concessionary Travel – Changes to the Taxicard Scheme’.

(2)               Yellow Line Parking Restrictions – Rayners Lane - Petition

Jeremy Zeid presented a petition signed by 100 people, with the following terms of reference:

“ We, the undersigned residents and businesses object to the following:

That Harrow Council is to impose more yellow line parking restrictions, without loading facilities, on the shops, services, businesses and customers of Rayners Lane and its environs.  This at a time of economic uncertainty and reduced takings, borders on collective municipal insanity.  The Council should make life easier, not harder.

The punitive actions will prevent businesses, deliveries, collections and customers from shopping, loading or unloading without risking a £60 welcome-to-Harrow “revenue raiser”.  Businesses already in difficulty will close, the rest will be badly hit.  The result will be another once thriving shopping street (like Station Road), turned by a greedy, seemingly uncaring Council, into another shuttered ghost town full of betting shops, loan-sharks, pawnbrokers and closed premises and a seething, growing resentment by people at the ends of their tethers.

May WE, the taxpaying residents and businesses of Harrow remind the Council who pays for them, their employees and all of the buildings, and demand that this appalling decision be reversed immediately as any delay for “consultations” will not only cost residents and businesses dearly, but also the Council in its inevitably reduced “revenue” and increased benefits bill.”

RESOLVED:  That the petition be received and referred to the Corporate Director of Environment and Enterprise and the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety for consideration.

(3)               The Croft, Playing Field, Pinner HA5 - Petition

A local resident presented a petition signed by 305 people, with the following terms of reference:

“ We, the undersigned, oppose the decision made to keep the gates of The Croft, Playing Field (off Cannonbury Avenue and Glover Road, Pinner, HA5) open throughout the night. Reasons for opposition:  This will

·           encourage anti-social behaviour, including underage drinking and the use of drugs;

·           provide unlawful access to our properties without being seen or noticed, in the dark, and be targeted and burgled;

·           leave home owners and their families vulnerable and fear for their safety, most of whom have young children or are elderly;

·           definitely impact on the market value of our properties.

The Croft has been subject to anti-social behaviour prior to the gates being installed, hence the effort by the public and the Safer Neighbourhood Watch to fight to get them installed and closed during unsociable hours.”

RESOLVED:  That the petition be received  ...  view the full minutes text for item 665.

To receive any public questions received in accordance with paragraph 16 of the Executive Procedure Rules.

Questions will be asked in the order notice of them was received and there be a time limit of 15 minutes.

[The deadline for receipt of public questions is 3.00 pm, 15 July 2013.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk  

No person may submit more than one question].

RESOLVED:  To note that the following public questions had been received:

1.

2.

To receive any Councillor questions received in accordance with paragraph 17 of the Executive Procedure Rules.

Questions will be asked in the order agreed with the relevant Group Leader by the deadline for submission and there be a time limit of 15 minutes.

[The deadline for receipt of Councillor questions is 3.00 pm, 15 July 2013].

RESOLVED:  To note the following Councillor Questions had been received:

1.

RESOLVED: To note the contents of the Key Decision Schedule for July 2013.

For consideration.

RESOLVED: To receive and note the progress of scrutiny projects.

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources.

Cabinet received a report of the Corporate Director of Resources, which summarised the discussion at the meeting of the Partnership Board held on 27 June 2013.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director of Environment and Enterprise.

Resolved to RECOMMEND: (to Council) 

That

(1)               the CIL Charging Schedule and the Instalments Policy and Regulation 123 List appended to the Schedule be adopted;

(2)               a commencement date of 1 October 2013 for the coming into effect of the CIL Charging Schedule be approved.

Reason for Recommendation:  To provide an important mechanism for the funding of infrastructure to support the implementation of the Local Plan.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

[Call-in does not apply to this recommendation as the decision is reserved to Council.]

The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regeneration introduced the report, which set out the outcome of the examination into Harrow’s Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule and for Council to approve and adopt the Charging Schedule.

The Portfolio Holder explained the background to the report and explained that the CIL would allow local authorities to raise funds from developers to pay for the infrastructure that was needed as a result of their development.  He added that the Council had consulted on the proposed rates and submitted its Charging Schedule for Independent Examination where it had been concluded that the Council had taken a pragmatic approach towards setting the rates.

Cabinet Members were informed that changes to the CIL could be made by future administrations.  The Portfolio Holder responded to questions from the non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Members about the impact of the proposed charges on Care Homes and Use Class A1 Retail and the overall impact on small businesses at a time when the Council was looking for these to expand and create jobs for local residents.  He drew attention to the conclusions reached by the Independent Examiner that the Council’s decision to set the CIL rates was based on reasonable assumptions about development value and likely costs.  The evidence suggested that residential and commercial development would remain viable across most of the borough, especially those parts where substantial development was planned, if the charge was applied.  The Independent Examiner had concluded that the proposed charge rate would not put the overall development of the area at serious risk.

Cabinet noted that the report proposed a start date of 1 October 2013 and discussions ensued about how this could be achieved and what governance arrangements had been put in place.  The Chief Executive outlined the options available to Members, and officers outlined the impact of any delay in the implementation of the start date.  An agreement on how the start date would be achieved would follow after the meeting.   

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Council) 

That

(1)               the CIL Charging Schedule and the Instalments Policy and Regulation 123 List appended to the Schedule be adopted;

(2)               a commencement date of 1 October 2013 for the coming into effect of the CIL Charging Schedule be approved.

Reason for Recommendation:  To provide an important mechanism for the funding of infrastructure to support the implementation of the Local Plan.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

[Call-in does not apply to this recommendation as the decision is reserved to Council.]

Report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               phase 2 of the Primary School Expansion Programme be moved to the statutory process for permanent expansion, as stated in Appendix A to the report;

(2)               the Special School SEN Placements Planning Framework, at Appendix B to the report, be approved;

(3)               the Amalgamation Policy, at Appendix C to the report, be confirmed;

(4)               the progress made in developing the Harrow’s Early Years Strategy be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To fulfill the local authority’s statutory duties to provide sufficient, high quality school places in its area as part of its strategic role as champion for parents and families, for vulnerable pupils and of educational excellence.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

The Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families introduced the report, which set out school organisation issues in Harrow, including School Place Planning, Phase 2 of the Primary School Expansion Programme, Special School SEN Placements Planning Framework, Early Years Strategy and Amalgamation Policy.  The Portfolio Holder informed Cabinet that there had been a 33% rise in bulge classes and the pressures to provide extra places in schools.

An officer outlined the implications of the Department of Education’s announcement to fund the expansion of 15 schools in Harrow and its relationship with the Special Educational Needs (SEN) Placement Planning Framework which, together, would help provide more opportunities for children in Harrow.

The Portfolio Holder and the Corporate Director of Children and Families responded to questions from non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Members on Council policy regarding academies and consultation, projections and delegations, as follows:

·                     the Council had an excellent relationship with all the schools in the borough, including faith schools and academies which were autonomous. All types of schools would continue to be supported by the Portfolio Holder and the Directorate;

·                     robust consultation mechanisms were in place following the incorporation of the lessons learnt from the Vaughan School expansion. The money from the Department of Education would help contingencies to be put in place where planning permission for expansion was not granted to schools. The money would also help build in flexibility;

·                     projections made in relation to school place planning and pupil growth had been accurate and that the Council had managed to offer a place to all children whose applications had been received on time;

·                     there was a risk of undersupply in the school places available at both primary and secondary levels. However, appropriate measures were in place and all options would be investigated;

·                     delegations put in place by Cabinet in November 2012 were appropriate for application where there was a need for other schools to be identified for permanent expansion. The relevant shadow Portfolio Holders would be kept abreast of developments in this area, including the capital spend in relation to the expansion;

·                     a briefing note setting out the Department for Education’s announcement to fund the expansion of 15 schools would be issued soon.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               phase 2 of the Primary School Expansion Programme be moved to the statutory process for permanent expansion, as stated in Appendix A to the report;

(2)               the Special School SEN Placements Planning Framework, at Appendix B to the report, be approved;

(3)               the Amalgamation Policy, at Appendix C to the report, be confirmed;

(4)               the progress made in developing the Harrow’s Early Years Strategy be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To fulfill the local authority’s statutory duties to provide sufficient, high quality school places in its area as part of its strategic role as champion for parents and families, for vulnerable pupils and of educational excellence.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 672.

Report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the process taken by officers in entering into a Framework Agreement with the West London Independent Fostering Agency Framework headed by the London Borough of Hillingdon for a period of up to four years be noted;

(2)               authority be delegated to the Corporate Director of Children and Families, in consultation with Portfolio Holder of Children, Schools and Families, to enter into the West London Independent Fostering Agency Framework for the provision of independent foster carers.

Reason for Decision:  To enter into the Framework Agreement with other boroughs and delegating authority.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

The Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families introduced the report, which set out the Framework that would allow the use of collective purchasing power of West London local authorities to deliver preferable rates of Independent Fostering Agencies (IFAs) with additional fee reductions and discounts, including other benefits.

The Framework would

·                     enable the partners to effectively manage the quality and availability of placements and ensure that more local placements were made available locally;

·                     help deliver more efficient commissioning arrangements for Looked After Children placed with IFAs.

A non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member was concerned about the savings that would be achieved which were in the region of up to 2% only and how these compared to the unit costs of the placements.  In response, the Corporate Director of Children and Families stated that the unit costs had been benchmarked and were the best in London.  She added that it was important to recognise that the children in question would have complex needs.

The Chief Executive, who Chaired the West London Alliance Children’s Group, confirmed that the Framework for IFA was the best in London and would provide care in a family setting.  He acknowledged that whilst the initial savings were small there were opportunities for the longer term.

The same non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member asked about the break clauses and whether the Framework was the right one to join.  The Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families said that the Council could leave the contract at any time but that a departure of any Council would have an impact on the Framework.  The Corporate Director of Children and Families added that the prices would vary and that other Councils had shown an interest in joining the Framework.  Moreover, there were a wide range of providers which could drive costs down even further.  In conclusion, she explained that the process of fostering Looked After Children who often had complex needs was expensive.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the process taken by officers in entering into a Framework Agreement with the West London Independent Fostering Agency Framework headed by the London Borough of Hillingdon for a period of up to four years be noted;

(2)               authority be delegated to the Corporate Director of Children and Families, in consultation with Portfolio Holder of Children, Schools and Families, to enter into the West London Independent Fostering Agency Framework for the provision of independent foster carers.

Reason for Decision:  To enter into the Framework Agreement with other boroughs and delegating authority.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None. 

Report of the Corporate Director of Community, Health and Wellbeing.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               a new service model, which incorporated a focus on internal services for those with the highest needs, provided in specialist environments and in which people with lower needs would be supported by alternative providers in the community, be agreed;

Phase One: Reducing & Rationalising Buildings

During Phase One, the Council would make operational changes to services to tackle the current over provision of spaces and offer best value for money.  This would deliver required Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) savings during 2013/14 whilst moving towards the proposed service model.

During this phase the Council would reduce the number of Council buildings used by in-house services from seven to four.  Capacity at Sancroft Hall would also be utilised as the Council moved to this approach.  Current vacancy levels in all five facilities would ensure that the Council could continue to offer high quality day opportunities as it transitioned to the new model.

The Council would support service users to maintain friendship and peer groups, which consultation had demonstrated to be important to them.  Services provided would be at the current level, and of a similar type.  The Council would commence planning for comprehensive reviews of individual needs to take place in Phase Two.

Phase Two:  Longer Term Changes to Delivery in NRCs

During Phase Two we would implement changes to deliver the new day opportunities model.  This will include the development of specialised services to meet the needs of the most vulnerable in the community.

Phase Two would involve changes over a period of time, including individual assessment and support planning to help people to identify the most appropriate service for their needs.

(2)               the transformation of individual services during Phase Two of implementation, as described below, be approved:

A: Byron Neighbourhood Resource Centre -  A specialised service would be provided for people with a learning disability including challenging behaviour and Autism;

B: Kenmore Neighbourhood Resource Centre - A specialised service would be provided for people with Complex Physical and/or Sensory Disabilities;

C: Vaughan Neighbourhood Resource Centre - A specialised service would be provided for people with a learning disability and complex needs;

D: Milmans Neighbourhood Resource Centre - A specialised service would be provided for older people including people with dementia;

(3)               the Council cease to use the following buildings for day opportunities for vulnerable people:

Bentley Neighbourhood Resource Centre – the Council would consider alternative use or potential disposal of this property.

Gordon Avenue – Officers would negotiate with the owner of the property in relation to changing/ending use.

Bedford House – The building would continue to be used as a permanent residential care home for ten people with a learning disability as approved by Cabinet in March 2013.  The Council would consider the future use of this building;

(4)               theCapital Programme be amended so that this resource could be made available for capital works which arise from this review, and the recent review of Residential Care services.  This would rename the capital project for "Bentley  ...  view the full decision text for item 674.

The Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing introduced the report, which set out the conclusions of the consultation, including further work that had taken place, on a new Model of Day Opportunities in Harrow following Cabinet’s decision in January 2013.  The report sought approval for transforming Day Opportunities in Harrow.

The Portfolio Holder added that the consultation had engaged with approximately 650 people and it was important to make the changes for the following reasons:

·                     to ensure that the services provided were used effectively and levels of underuse addressed;

·                     that the Council was responding appropriately to the demographic changes;

·                     the need to respond to the personalisation agenda which gives people a choice of services to use;

·                     the need to support those most in need by ensuring they can access the services provided by the Council.

The Portfolio Holder appreciated that the proposals would entail change which would concern some users and she was sad about this but felt that service provision would improve as a result of the proposals.  She added that the situation would continue to be handled with the utmost sensitivity and trust, as there was a great deal of work to be done to bring the proposals to fruition.  The Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) was thorough and explained how the Council would mitigate adverse impacts.

The Portfolio Holder added that the process had been put in train by her predecessor and that she had seen some of the benefits that would ensue as a result of the proposals.  However, the process was not complete and discussions would continue and she empathised with the disabled movement, with whom the ongoing work would continue.

The Corporate Director of Community, Health and Wellbeing referred to the report, which set out many benefits of the proposals alongside some challenges.  He added that the proposals would also allow some disabled people to return to Harrow and use services near their families.

An officer detailed the feedback received from various organisations and users and explained that the recommendations set out in the report allowed for the same level of service to be provided to users.  The officer added that the Council was committed to working with users to identify their requirements, such as friendship groups which many users wanted retained.  He added that it was essential that there was choice but where there were preferences, the Council would aim to support them.  In addition, service users would help design facilities, such as the provision of gym(s) within the buildings.

The Non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Members asked why the original proposals to Cabinet were not being revisited by the new administration.

In response to some comments about the use of Bentley Day Centre, the Corporate Director of Community, Health and Wellbeing stated that whilst he could not comment on individual cases, the process culminating into the report before Cabinet had commenced in January 2013 when Cabinet authorised consultations, and he confirmed that substantial changes had been made to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 674.

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the new Discretionary Housing Payment Policy for 2013/14, as recommended by officers, be agreed and adopted;

(2)               the policy remain in place for future years unless a substantial change in legislation or funding results in a need for review;

(3)               the Policy be reviewed in any event after a period of three years if it remained unchanged.

Reason for Decision:  The Discretionary Housing Payment policy had incorporated feedback from consultation with internal services, the public and voluntary agencies.  It had been shaped to target £1.2m between those households identified as in greatest need following the implementation of welfare reforms to Housing Benefits.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

Cabinet received a report of the Corporate Director of Resources, which set out the changes to the Discretionary Housing Payment Policy in light of increased funding from the government in response to the welfare reforms.   The changes would provide additional housing payments to support those residents on low incomes and who were in receipt of housing benefit but where the residents were also being affected by the government cuts to their benefits.

Cabinet Members were informed that in order to mitigate the impact of the welfare reforms, the Council had received extra Discretionary Housing Payment Grant (DHP) to help those residents in financial hardship with ‘housing costs’.  The Portfolio Holder for Housing contributed by saying that, this year, Harrow had £1.2million to support households, a 400% increase on last year, and had consulted widely with Housing Associations, the Voluntary Sector, the Council’s Housing and Children’s Services to ensure that policy and key criteria were developed to effectively award the money to those most in need.

Discretionary Housing Payments were part of a range of measures the Council was offering as part of its Harrow Help Scheme, to support those hit by benefit changes, alongside an Emergency Relief scheme, a Hardship Fund and Xcite Funding.

The Divisional Director of Collections and Housing Benefits clarified that the recipients of the Discretionary Housing Payment would be those people who were in receipt of housing benefit and that the Policy would target those affected.  In response to a further question from a non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member, the Divisional Director stated that the legislation restricted the use of the funds to the provision of financial assistance for the purposes of ‘housing costs’ and other claimants could not qualify for Discretionary Housing Payment.  Any unspent money would have to be returned to the Department for Work and Pensions.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the new Discretionary Housing Payment Policy for 2013/14, as recommended by officers, be agreed and adopted;

(2)               the policy remain in place for future years unless a substantial change in legislation or funding results in a need for review;

(3)               the Policy be reviewed in any event after a period of three years if it remained unchanged.

Reason for Decision:  The Discretionary Housing Payment policy had incorporated feedback from consultation with internal services, the public and voluntary agencies.  It had been shaped to target £1.2m between those households identified as in greatest need following the implementation of welfare reforms to Housing Benefits.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None. 

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the scheme changes as recommended by officers in the body of the report, namely the adoption of Option (2), a maximum of 40 trips per annum for all users with effect from 1 October 2013 be agreed;

(2)               the scheduled review of all existing members during 2013/14 be noted;

(3)               it be noted that officers would be liaising with London Councils regarding the issues raised by users and HAD regarding the operation of the Taxicard Scheme;

(4)               the implementation of additional trips on top of the new scheme allowance for the period 1 October 2013 to 31 March 2014 to support phasing from current scheme into new scheme be agreed; however

(i)                 for those users who were previously allocated 104 trips, an additional allocation of 20 trips for the year 2013/14 only for the period 1 October 2013 until 31 March 2014, be agreed so long as no more than 52 trips had been used by 30 September 2014, otherwise scheme holders would be given the balance of 72 trips minus their trip usage to 30 September 2013;

(ii)               for those users who were previously allocated 52 trips, an additional allocation of 20 trips for the year 2013/14 only for the period 1 October 2013 until 31 March 2014, so long as no more than 26 trips had been used by 30 September 2013, otherwise scheme holders would be given the balance of 46 trips minus their trip usage to 30 September 2013.

(5)               resolution (4) above would provide transitional arrangements and would ensure that all scheme members had at least some trips for the rest of the year and specifically to use during the winter months when bad weather and lack of transport facilities could lead to unnecessary isolation.

Reason for Decision:  The changes proposed to the Taxicard Scheme had been shaped as a result of feedback from a wide consultation with residents and users of the Taxicard Scheme.  Feedback from the consultation had influenced both the proposals that have been put to Cabinet for consideration and the Equality Impact Assessment showing the impacts of these changes. 

To implement the changes to the Taxicard on 1 October 2013 and provide transitional arrangements. 

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  As set out in the report.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

Cabinet considered a report of the Corporate Director of Resources, which set out proposed changes to the Taxicard Scheme as a result of the need to make savings to balance the Council’s budget for the next financial year.  The report showed how feedback from the consultation had shaped the changes put forward.

The Leader of the Council, in his capacity as Portfolio Holder for Finance, stated that it was with a ‘heavy heart’ that he was introducing this report, which had been due to the need to eliminate a budget gap.  However, the Council had to make difficult decisions and the proposal to reduce the Taxi Card scheme trip to 40 for all Members with effect from October 2013 was being proposed to make a saving of £200,000.

The Leader added that a comprehensive consultation exercise had been undertaken and the feedback received had been carefully analysed.  The consultation had provided three options:

·                     an increase in the contribution to £5.00 for every individual trip a member of the Taxicard scheme took representing an increase of £2.50;

·                     a reduction in all trips to 40 a year;

·                     a combination of the two options above.

It was noted that users had, overwhelmingly, chosen the option of having the trips reduced to 40.  The Leader added that he was mindful of the impact of the proposals, as he was aware that there were approximately 450 users who currently had been allocated 104 trips per annum, rather than the usual 52 because they had no other travel concessions, who might be severely affected by the introduction of these changes mid-year when they may already have used more than the new allowance of 40 trips by the time of implementation.  As a result, he proposed an additional recommendation, which was duly seconded by the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regeneration, which would provide transitional arrangements for users.

The Leader of the Council informed Members that the consultation had also brought to attention the many failings with the existing providers and it was intended to lobby London Councils in this regard.  A meeting date had been agreed where Officers, Members and representatives from Harrow Association of Disabled (HAD) people would put forward the findings with a view to ensuring a better service or the procurement of different contractors in the future.

In response to questions from the Portfolio Holders for Environment and Community Safety and Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing, the Leader agreed that the role of the NHS in this area needed to be investigated though the Council’s Health and Wellbeing Board.  The Leader also responded to additional questions from the non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Members about the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) which he was satisfied with, including that the consultation, which had received a high number of responses, had been thorough and inclusive.  He added that the Council needed to save money and a way of achieving this was by providing efficient services.  A non-voting non-Executive Member was pleased with the mitigation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 676.

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources.

RESOLVED:  That  the report be noted and Portfolio Holders continue working with officers to achieve improvement against identified key challenges.

Reason for Decision:  To enable Cabinet to be informed of performance against key measures and to identify and assign corrective action where necessary.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  None.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

Cabinet received a report of the Corporate Director of Resources summarising Council and service performance against key measures, including areas requiring attention.

The Leader of the Council, in his capacity as Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services, reflected on the past year and highlighted some of the key aspects of the report, as follows:

·                     the end of year financial position was favourable, with a net underspend of nearly £1m after transfers to various reserves;

·                     Adult Services had seen more successful Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection of services, a positive expert review of safeguarding, national recognition for the quality assurance system and strong performance on key indicators, especially on personalisation where the Council was a national leader;

·                     the school expansion programme would address increases in the primary school population, with an additional 17 reception classes opening in September 2013.  A process for looking at permanent expansions would start in the autumn.  Meanwhile Ofsted inspection judgments of overall effectiveness showed Harrow schools as significantly better than both London and England figures;

·                     Harrow was one of only 11 boroughs to exceed GLA growth expectations significantly and successfully achieved its 40% affordable homes target.  Proactive planning had seen a further £1bn of new development granted permission during the year;

·                     inward investment opportunities had been pursued and Harrow was one of only two Councils represented at inception of the Memorandum of Understanding between the United Kingdom and India for strengthening partnerships in urban regeneration;

·                     10 apprenticeships and 60 work placements had been facilitated by the Council and 182 supported into work through the Xcite Scheme.  Approximately, 1,009 people had attended job fairs that the Council had organised. In the face of the economic challenges that the country faced, the Council’s efforts to help get people back to work was of real importance.  Additionally, the Council continued to lobby for improvements in the performance of the DWP Work Programme;

·                     work had started on public realm improvements such as in St Ann’s Road and Lowlands Park;

·                     the take up of online MyHarrow account had exceeded expectations, with 31,000 in place at the end of March, enabling Harrow residents to access a range of Council services on line at their convenience;

·                     the performance in containing levels of homelessness was outstanding, and the best in London, but the Council was not complacent;

·                     the majority of the Priority Actions were on track at year end.

The non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Members asked about the challenges faced by the Children and Families Directorate in relation to the Workforce Strategy, including why the workforce in this service area suffered from a high turnover, and the improvement plans proposed for the Youth Offending Service.  The same Members were concerned about decision-making and the need to have a true picture of the situation to ensure effective decision-making.

The Corporate Director of Children and Families responded as follows:

·                     that there had been a high turnover of staff in Children’s Services but regular meetings were held with staff to identify  ...  view the full minutes text for item 677.

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the outturn position for Treasury Management activities for 2012/13 be noted;

(2)               the report be referred to the Governance, Audit and Risk Management Committee for review.

Reason for Decision:  To promote effective financial management and comply with the Local Authorities (Capital Finance and Accounting) Regulations 2003 and other relevant guidance.  To keep Cabinet Members informed of Treasury Management activities and performance.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  None.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

[Call-in does not apply, as the decision was for noting only.]

The Leader of the Council introduced the report, which set out the summary of Treasury Management Activities for 2012/13.  The report explained that Treasury Management was the management of the Council’s investments and cash flows, its banking, money market and debt transactions together with the effective control of the risks associated with those activities.  The Local Government Act 2003 required local authorities to produce an annual treasury report reviewing treasury management activities and the prudential and treasury indicators.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the outturn position for Treasury Management activities for 2012/13 be noted;

(2)               the report be referred to the Governance, Audit and Risk Management Committee for review.

Reason for Decision:  To promote effective financial management and comply with the Local Authorities (Capital Finance and Accounting) Regulations 2003 and other relevant guidance.  To keep Cabinet Members informed of Treasury Management activities and performance.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  None.

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation Granted:  None.

[Call-in does not apply, as the decision was for noting only.]