Agenda, decisions and minutes

[Note 1:  In the absence of the Leader for agenda items 11 and 12 (Minutes 692 and 693 refer), the Deputy Leader, Councillor Asad Omar, assumed the Chair prior to concluding the business at 8.22 pm.]

[Note 2:  The agenda was taken in the order set out in the papers for the meeting except that, at the invitation of the Leader of the Council,  the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety made an announcement in relation to the locking of park gates (Minute 682 refers) at the conclusion of agenda item 3, Minutes.  It was customary for the minutes to show the formal business first, followed by any Recommendations to Council prior to the general decisions made by Cabinet.]

To receive apologies for absence (if any).

An apology for lateness was received on behalf of Councillor Hall, who had been delayed on her return journey from 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 there were no declarations of interests made by Members.

That the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 18 July 2013 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

A non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member mentioned that that items appeared to be in a different order to that taken at the meeting.  He suggested that it would be useful to have a note on the order of the agenda so that Members could follow the minutes in chronological order.

The same Member referred to a number of statements made by the Corporate Director of Children and Families about issues and asked for clarification on her statements made at the meeting.

Cabinet agreed to defer the minutes until the next meeting to allow the clerk’s notes to be checked.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 18 July 2013 be deferred to the next Cabinet meeting.

The Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety referred to the correspondence and petitions he had received in relation to the decision taken by Cabinet in February 2013 not to lock park gates in order to achieve a saving of £70,000.

The Portfolio Holder added that having discussed this matter with his colleagues, park and cemetery gates would continue to be locked.  The decision taken in February 2013 would not be implemented and, as a Listening administration, the Council had considered the views of its residents who had not supported the proposal.  

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

(1)               Petition against Harrow Council’s Plans to abandon locking Harrow Recreation Ground and other parks at night

Mick Sayer, a local resident, stated that following the announcement by the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety that park gates would continue to be locked (Minutes 682 refers), the petition signed by 1,180 people which he had intended to present at Cabinet was now null and void.  However, he owed it to the signatories to the petition to hand over the petition to the Council and he thanked all those that had been involved in fighting against the proposal not to lock park gates.

. 

RESOLVED:  To note the comments of Mr Sayer.

(2)               Problem with Rats in Hamilton Crescent - Petition

Carole Martin, Secretary to the Eastcote Lane Tenants’ and Residents’ Association, presented a petition signed by 55 residents, with the following terms of reference:

“For some period of time residents have been reporting to Harrow Council that there is an ongoing problem with rats in Hamilton Crescent, which has still not been resolved.  It is a waste of valuable Council resources when this has been allowed to continue for the time it has.

The Housing Department do not want to know and Environmental Health say even though this has been an ongoing problem the complaint has to start from scratch again with a phone call from the tenants.

We the undersigned are totally outraged at this response and demand that the rats in Hamilton Crescent are dealt with as a matter of urgency.”

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

(3)               Alley Gates, 2 Lancaster Road - Petition

Councillor James Bond presented a petition signed by 11 people, with the following terms of reference:

“We the undersigned residents request the Council arrange for the installation of alley gates beside the property at 2 Lancaster Road and the property at the corner of this road fronting Imperial Drive as a matter of urgency.

We note that the Council and residents in other areas of Harrow have been proactive in taking these initiatives and would welcome such action in the area where we all live in order to restrict access to the alley behind residential homes in Imperial Drive by persons who have no legitimate need to go there.

The installation of alley gates will help curtail the following:  the risk of burglary; the persistence of fly-tipping, vandalism and other anti-social behaviour.

The installation of alley gates will, in addition, help to achieve: a welcoming and safer environment for the residents whose back gardens border the alleyway; a more attractive neighbourhood that returns control of the alleyway to the residents concerned.”

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.

(4)               Cambridge  ...  view the full minutes text for item 683.

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, Monday 9 September 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.

3.

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, Monday 9 September 2013].

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

1.

Following questions by a non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member, it was noted that the following items set out in the Key Decision Schedule (KDS) for the month of September had been deferred: Harrow School SPD, Major Works Procurement and Youth Justice Plan.  The same Member questioned the delays on these items, which would impact on the Council’s ability to achieve a balanced budget.

The relevant Portfolio Holders reported as follows:

·                     Harrow School SPD had been deferred to October Cabinet and that this would allow for an extended six week consultation period, as requested by the non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member;

·                     Youth Justice Plan would initially be reported to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 17 September 2013 and thereafter to Cabinet. The delay in bringing the Plan to fruition had been as a result of the  challenges in such policy areas;

·                     Parking Review, 20 minute free parking initiative, would be reported to Cabinet on November 2013 and early indications showed that the figures were in line with budget assumptions.

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

For consideration.

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

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Council)

That the Community Safety Plan 2013-2017 be adopted.

Reason for Recommendation:  To comply with Section 6 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

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 to this recommendation as the decision is reserved to Council.]

The Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety introduced the report, which set out key community safety priorities in response to both the Strategic Assessment of crime in Harrow and the ambitions for the police set by the Mayor’s Office for policing and crime.  He added that the Plan which included measures to protect residents had been set for a period of three years.

In response to various questions from a non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member, the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety, the Chief Executive and an officer responded as follows:

·                     burglary was key issue and as part of the campaign titled ‘autumn nights’, advice would be provided to residents on how to take precautions, such as locking doors and windows, keeping valuables safe, and how the use of electronic devices could help keep their homes safe against burglars.  A sum of £8,000 had been received to help advertise the project which would be implemented soon to coincide with the early evenings from October 2013 to February 2014;

·                     that the borough’s position from second to seventh in terms of overall crime in London, whilst disturbing, would be addressed by the Borough Commander through improved co-ordination of information and interventions across the seven key crime areas;

·                     with regard to domestic violence, Harrow was ranked 27^th in London. Long term preventative work was being explored with MOPAC (The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime), and the Children and Families Directorate had already introduced a vulnerable Young People Panel and early intervention measures;

·                     it was intended to place on record, that contrary to reports, the number of police officers on Harrow’s streets was actually going to increase.  The perception of crime and fear of crime continued to be an issue;

·                     despite the spending reductions, the number of Police Officers on Harrow’s streets would increase over the next three years compared with 2011 numbers by an additional 46 Police Officers within the Safer Neighbourhood Teams and an additional 30 within other teams.  There would be an overall increase the establishment from 416 to 492.  This would help increase confidence in the Police and their morale;

·                     publicity for SmartWater would be renewed to ensure a higher take up then in the past.  The number of Neighbourhood Champions had remained static and the project would be re-invigorated through a conference with a key note speaker being invited to address the meeting.  The Portfolio Holder expected that Councillor Susan Hall, who had introduced and championed its cause, would be the Council’s key note speaker;

·                     benchmarks had been incorporated in the Plan, as requested by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

It was noted that the target figure relating to anti-social behaviour was -5%.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Council)

That the Community Safety Plan 2013-2017 be adopted.

Reason for Recommendation:  To comply with Section 6 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  None.

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

[Call-in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 688.

Reference from the Call-in Sub-Committee meeting held on 5 August 2013.

A non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member asked what actions had been taken in regard to the Statement made by the Chairman of the Call-in Sub?Committee that the changes not be implemented until the Scheme users had been made aware of alternative arrangements with other transport providers, particularly in respect of transport for doctor and hospital appointments.

The Portfolio Holder for Adults Social Care, Health and Wellbeing replied that, within her wider remit, she was seeking meeting(s) with the hospital Chief Executive(s) to address aspects of this issue.

The Leader of the Council agreed to provide the Member with a written response on the actions taken in response to the Statement.

RESOLVED:  That the Statement, by the Call-in Sub-Committee Chairman, as set out in the reference report, be noted and that a response be provided on the actions taken.

Reason for Decision:  To identify actions taken.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:  None.

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

Report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the provision of special needs transport services, to include all routes to and out of borough schools and colleges and in-borough mainstream schools and colleges, be further outsourced;

(2)               in the event these measures do not achieve the necessary savings as set out in the report, the Corporate Director of Children and Families, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holders, be authorised to make a decision to fully or partially outsource the transport arrangements for one of the special schools, most probably Shaftesbury High School;

(3)               the letting of a second transport provider framework contract to allow new providers to assist in the outsourcing referred to above be agreed.

Reason for Decision:  The Council had set a two year balanced budget that addressed the loss in government grants and safeguarded essential front-line services. Harrow Council has listened to the views of service users, staff, stakeholders and trades’ unions in altering plans from a full to a partial outsourcing.  The Trade Union, Unison, has produced an alterative proposal that officers have analysed and discussed in detail which has in part enabled a recommendation to be made to Cabinet.

If the service was to be externalised to a larger extent, a second framework would be needed to provide resilience in the supply chain, sustainable growth in small suppliers and the inclusion of more local and community based organisations in future transport provision.

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 Children and Families, which set out the results of the consultations with staff, service users and trade unions on the proposed changes to the Special Needs Transport Service.  The intention was to let a new framework contract for transport provision.

The Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families introduced the report and informed Cabinet of the consultation process undertaken following the referral back by the Call-In Sub-Committee of the initial decision taken by Cabinet in April 2013.  As a listening administration they had worked closely with the Unions and staff with a view to reviewing the original proposals and she thanked the Unions for their contributions to the process, including their draft proposals.  The Portfolio Holder outlined the saving that would be achieved and referred to the further possible outsourcing.

The Divisional Director of Special Needs Service referred to the comments of the Portfolio Holder and the amended proposals following consultations.  He too outlined the need for further outsourcing should this become necessary if the required savings were not achieved.

A non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member referred to the lamentable consultation and asked why the initial consultation had been poor.  He questioned whether the outsourcing would be on a rolling basis. In response, the Divisional Director stated that the outsourcing would take place over a couple of years but the detail needed to be defined.  He added that the framework under which the outsourcing would operate would be published, subject to the rules of procurement.  It would also be guided by how the families chose to use the services.

The same non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member asked why partial outsourcing had not previously been considered, as it generally helped retain expertise.  He also asked if the final outcome had changed since the consultations.  The Member was of the view that it would have been helpful if opportunity costs had been included in the report together with how the concerns of staff had been addressed in relation to their transfer under TUPE.  He asked if the process would create resilience in the supply chain and whether it would be advisable to do this now.  He also expressed concern about the impact of the proposals on the vulnerable.

The Divisional Director and the Corporate Director of Children and Families replied that, on reflection, the initial consultation had been rushed and the report considered in April 2013 ought to have been postponed to a future Cabinet meeting.  The fundamental difference between the two reports was an agreed way forward on a partial outsourcing, which had involved work with the Unions and schools.  This was underpinned by the need to ensure flexibility to meet future needs.  Together with the Portfolio Holder, the Corporate Director, informed Cabinet that safeguarding of children was an important issue and priority and that, in Harrow, ‘quality’ checks had been instigated.  The safe transport of children was imperative and a quality service needed to be in place in order to meet the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 690.

Report of the Corporate Director of Resources.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted and the 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, which summarised Council and service performance for Quarter 1 against key measures and drew attention to areas requiring action.

The Leader of the Council informed Cabinet that this was the first performance report of the financial year.  The format of the report had changed to reflect the Corporate Plan and focused on outcomes for residents and service users.  The Corporate Scorecard had been redesigned as follows:  66 old measures had been removed, 51 retained and 5 new ones added.  Not all measures would be reported quarterly as some outcomes changed relatively slowly, such as health and educational attainment.  The data on such items would be included when available.  The Leader and the Corporate Director of Resources highlighted some key performance areas.

A non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member congratulated the Council on some of its achievements, such as the increase in the take up of personal budgets by atleast 6%. She was pleased to learn of the review of thresholds and the resultant outcomes in relation to the protection of children.  However, the Member remained concerned about the challenges within the Youth Offending team, which showed that it was improving, and enquired about the comparative data for monitoring purposes, including any evidence in any improvements. 

In response, the Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families provided examples of some improvements, such as the carrying out of timely visits and an improvement in the assessment conducted.  The Portfolio Holder referred to a report on the Youth Justice Plan which had been included on the 17 September 2013 Overview and Scrutiny Committee agenda and she looked forward to the Committee’s contributions that would help further improve the service.

The same non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member enquired about the actions being taken to address the poor performance in relation to NI195, street and environmental cleanliness, which was rated as High Red.  She was of the view that the cuts imposed in the Environment and Enterprise Directorate, which had reduced sweepers in Harrow Town Centre and road cleaners in Harrow, had been unprecedented and damaging.  Additionally, some of the key routes, such as Rayners Lane, were in a poor state of cleanliness and impacted adversely on all residents of Harrow and the situation was getting worse.  She enquired if any independent monitoring was taking place.  Additionally, it was disappointing that grass was left to grow with a view to creating meadows and enquired how complaints were monitored.

Another non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member referred to the dissatisfaction of residents living in the vicinity of Belmont Circle about the poor state of cleanliness.  He highlighted the depth of feeling in this regard and the adverse impact on residents.  He was of the view that kerb appeal was important to residents.  The Member asked if there was a cause for concern in relation to the increase in the number of empty units in the Harrow Town Centre, whether the poor state of cleanliness was a contributing factor and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 691.

Report of the Director of Finance and Assurance.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the revenue and capital forecast outturn position at the end of June 2013 be noted;

(2)               the both the Revenue and Capital virements detailed in paragraphs 12, 15, 16, 17 and 24 of the report be approved.

Reason for Decision: To present the forecast financial position and actions required to be taken.

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 Director of Finance and Assurance, which set out the Council’s revenue and capital monitoring position as at 30 June 2013, including the actions required to manage overspend.  The Director of Finance and Assurance informed Cabinet that the report included a detailed breakdown of the financial position by Directorates together with the performance against a number of savings as part of the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) agreed in February 2013.

A non-voting non-Executive Cabinet Member commented that the previous administration had attached a great deal of blame to the government because of the cuts it had imposed on local government.  However, the Council needed to appreciate that it was facing tough financial decisions and he was amazed to note the overspend and shortfall across various budgets / Directorates.  He stressed that tough times required tough decisions in the management of public money; otherwise contemptible decisions such as the removal of dog bins and keeping park gates unlocked would arise thereby making Harrow an unattractive place to live in.  He asked what measures were being taken to mitigate the overspend, including those where the decisions had been reversed.

The Chief Executive responded as follows:

·                     the Council was facing a future which would require significant amount of savings to be achieved and that the Council was not complacent in this regard;

·                     future savings would become more difficult to achieve and therefore self awareness and corrective actions had been put in place;

·                     he was confident that a balanced budget would be achieved at the end of the financial year and that he could not recall a time when this had not happened.  Good financial management was at the core of the Council’s business.

A non-voting non-Executive Member referred to the overspend on the PRISM project, which she categorised as poor decision-making.  She congratulated the Chief Executive for curtailing the project, which had been damaging to staff who had devoted their careers to the Council.  She noted that the overspend of £1m on this project was unavoidable.

The same Member referred to other poor decisions and overspends, such as the IT project and shared Legal Practice, including an overspend on staffing in the Procurement Service.  She would have expected the Procurement Service to have come in on budget.

The Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services and Housing gave prominence to those budgets that were underspent, such as the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) capital programme and the £150m which had been directed to the provision of affordable housing.  He added that his administration was exploring measures that would keep Harrow clean and tidy.

A non-voting non-Executive Member expressed concern over the overspend in respect of the outsourcing of Harrow’s library and leisure services and sought clarity on the driver behind an overspend of £380,000.  In response, the Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services and the Deputy Leader suggested that the rollover of the decision by the previous administration together with the eventual delay in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 692.