Agenda, decisions and minutes

The Leader of the Council sought Cabinet’s approval to vary the order of the agenda, and announced that:

1.                  a record number of public questions had been received, the majority of which related to agenda item 18, ‘Wood Farm, Wood Lane, Stanmore – Pear Wood Cottages and Ten Acre Field’. Public questions 2, 3, 4, 5, and 14 would be taken first.  Following these, questions relating to Wood Farm would be taken.  Prior to answering the public and Councillor questions relating to Wood Farm, there would be a statement from the Corporate Director Place Shaping; the purpose of this being to answer the public questions and a Councillor question.  Thereafter, there would be a time limit of 30 minutes for the asking and answering of public questions and a Councillor question, on Wood Farm. At the conclusion of the questions, the substantive item on Wood Farm would be considered by Cabinet.

2.                  Agenda item 8(c), ‘Admiral Nursing Petition’, would be considered, and Mr Neville Hughes allowed to address the meeting for up to 10 minutes.  The public and Councillor questions relating to this matter would be considered jointly.

3.                  All other business on the agenda would be dealt with in the order set out.

RESOLVED:  Cabinet agreed with the variation.

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests arising from business to be transacted at this meeting from:

(a)               all Members of the Cabinet;

(b)               all other Members present.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

Agenda Item 4 – Public Question

During consideration of public question 20, Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane declared a personal interest.  He would remain in the room whilst the question was answered.

Agenda Item 8(c) - Petition – Admiral Nursing

Councillor Thaya Idaikkadar declared a personal interest in that a relative suffered from dementia.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Agenda Item 14 – Grant Recommendations 2012/13

(i)                 Councillor Husain Akhtar declared a personal interest as a member of the Citizens’ Advice Bureau.  He would remain in the room to listen to the discussion on this matter.

(ii)               Councillor Brian Gate declared a prejudicial interest in that he served on the Citizens’ Advice Bureau Board of Trustees, which could receive a grant as part of the decision-making on the item.  He would leave the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

(iii)             Councillor Margaret Davine declared a personal interest as a member of the Women’s Centre and Relate.  She would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Agenda Item 18 – Wood Farm, Woodlane, Stanmore – Pear Wood Cottages and Ten Acre Field

(i)                 Councillor Tony Ferrari declared a prejudicial interest in that, as a former Member of Cabinet, he had been involved in the discussions on this matter.  He would leave the room whilst the matter was discussed, considered and voted upon.

(ii)               Councillor Husain Akhtar declared a personal interest and would remain in the room to listen to the discussion on this matter.

(iii)             Councillor Bill Stephenson stated that he wished to place on record that, contrary to the emails circulating, he was not a friend nor did he have knowledge of the prospective purchaser of Wood Farm.  He had met the prospective buyer once for a few minutes when he was putting up a building in his Ward and they had exchanged business cards.  Subsequently, he had met the buyer at a social function but had not recognised him when introduced.  He did not have any interests to declare in relation to Wood Farm.

That the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 9 February 2012 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 February 2012, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

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

RESOLVED:  To

(1)               note that the following petitions were received and referred to the Corporate Director Place Shaping and Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts;

(2)               note that the petitions relating to Wood Farm were considered during the decision-making relating to that item.

1.                  Anmer Lodge

Councillor Marilyn Ashton presented a petition signed by 296 people with the following terms of reference:

“We the undersigned express considerable concern at the decision of Harrow Council to market the Anmer Lodge and adjacent car park site without proper consultation, engagement or planning documentation.  We therefore call on the Council’s administration to:

·           cease all current activity on the Anmer Lodge and car park site.

·           complete the process of adopting a Supplementary Planning Document/Planning Brief, before giving any consideration to marketing the site.

·           conduct a complete and thorough consultation exercise with local residents, businesses and Ward Councillors on the development of the SPD/Planning Brief and on any subsequent proposals put forward by developers.”

2.                  Caring for the Environment – Harrow Nature Conservation Forum

Mr Stephen Bolsover, Chairman of Harrow Nature Conservation Forum, submitted a petition signed by 16 Wardens of eight publicly accessible nature reserves with the following terms of reference:

“We, the voluntary Wardens of Nature Reserves and Open Spaces within Harrow, call on the Cabinet to reject the proposed sale and lease of, respectively, the Pear Wood Cottages enclave and Ten Acre Field in Stanmore.  The proposed sale and lease is directly contrary to undertakings made by Council officials in 2008 and 2009 and that these areas would be integrated with Pear Wood Nature Reserve, and would greatly damage the natural atmosphere and biodiversity value of Pear Wood and its surroundings.”

3.                  Wood Farm

A local resident presented a petition signed by 7 people with the following terms of reference:

“We, the undersigned, call upon Harrow Council to defer any legal decision at tonight’s meeting as the representations and objections legal deadline is tomorrow and those responses to the statutory notice are not presented to the Cabinet.”

4.                  Save our Green Belt

A local resident presented a petition signed by 10 people with the following terms of reference:

“We, the undersigned, call upon Harrow Council to listen to the 8,200 signatories of the Save our Green Belt petition, submitted at the start of the Wood Farm 2006 planning application, and to refrain from desecrating further areas of our Green Belt in Harrow.”

5.                  Whitchurch Pavilion

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane presented a petition signed by 173 residents with the following terms of reference:

“We the undersigned express considerable concern at the decision of Harrow Council to select the Whitchurch Consortium as the preferred bidder to redevelop Whitchurch Pavilion and Playing Fields.  We therefore call on the Council’s administration to:

·           restart the tendering process for the development of the site.  We note that the current decision relied on information obtained from a tendering process which began over three years ago;

·           fully consult with local residents, businesses and Ward Councillors as part of the tendering  ...  view the full minutes text for item 382.

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, 5 March 2012.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk  

No person may submit more than one question].

RESOLVED:  To note that 20 public questions had been received, as set out below.

[The order of the public questions set out in the minutes has been altered to allow questions relating to substantive items on the agenda to be grouped together.]

[Public questions 2, 3, 4, 5 and 14 appear at the beginning but do not relate to any substantive items on the agenda.]

[Public questions 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, together with Councillor question 7 (Minute 384 refers), and statements relating to this matter should be read in conjunction with Minute 399, Wood Farm, Wood Lane, Stanmore - Pear Wood Cottages and Ten Acre Field.]

[Public question 1 and Councillor question 4 (Minute 384 refers), including statements responding to the questions on this matter, should be read in conjunction with Minute 389, ‘Petition – Admiral Nursing’.]

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, 5 March 2012].

RESOLVED:  To note that 14 Councillor Questions had been received, as follows:

[The order of the Councillor questions set out in the minutes has been altered to allow questions relating to substantive items on the agenda to be grouped together.]

[Councillor question 7 appears at the beginning and should be read in conjunction with public questions 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 (Minute 383 refers), together with the statements relating to this matter, including Minute 399, Wood Farm, Wood Lane, Stanmore - Pear Wood Cottages and Ten Acre Field.]

[Councillor question 4 and public question 1 (Minute 383 refers), including statements responding to the questions on this matter, should be read in conjunction with Minute 389, ‘Petition – Admiral Nursing’.]

[All other questions, including those that were not reached at Cabinet are set out at the end of this Minute.]

7.

The Leader of the Council informed Cabinet that the decision relating to ‘Transformation Programme Mobile and Flexible Working – Referral by the Call-In Sub-Committee’ was Key and had not been included on the March 2012 Forward Plan.  The agreement of the Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny Committee had been obtained as the decision could not be reasonably deferred. 

The Leader added that the decision relating to ‘Wood Farm, Wood Lane, Stanmore – Pear Wood Cottages and Ten Acre Field’ had not been included on the March Forward Plan and the Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny Committee had been notified that this item would be included on the 8 March Cabinet agenda for decision.

RESOLVED:  To note the contents of the Forward Plan for the period 1 March to 30 June 2012.

For consideration.

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

Motion referred to the Executive by Council.

RESOLVED:  That the Motion be referred to the Corporate Director Place Shaping and the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts.

[Call-in does not apply.]

RESOLVED:  That the Motion be referred to the Corporate Director Place Shaping and the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts.

[Call-in does not apply].

Motion referred to the Executive by Council.

RESOLVED:  That the Motion be referred to the Corporate Director Place Shaping and the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts.

[Call-in does not apply.]

RESOLVED:  That the Motion be referred to the Corporate Director Place Shaping and the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts.

[Call-in does not apply].

Petition referred to the Executive by Council.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               Cabinet notes the petition signed by over 2000 residents which indicates the need for a proper integrated health and social care service to cope with the needs of the elderly and frail people and their carers, in particular, those with dementia;

(2)               Cabinet further notes that the Harrow Strategic Partnership has adopted a borough-wide joint Dementia Strategy and supports this joint work; the Department of Health has allocated dedicated funding to provide advice and support for memory services; the new reablement services help identify dementia sufferers earlier; Harrow is one of the top performing Councils for providing support for carers;

(3)               notwithstanding this Cabinet believes proper care of the elderly can only be solved at national level;

(4)               Cabinet therefore instructs the Chief Executive to write to Harrow’s three MPs and the GLA Member for Brent and Harrow (i) informing them of the above and (ii) drawing their attention for the need for a comprehensive National Care Service and asks that they lobby for a positive outcome arising from the government’s consideration of the Dilnot report in the forthcoming Social Care White Paper.

[Call-in does not apply]

In accordance with the Council’s Petition Scheme, Cabinet considered a petition referred by Council.  The contained over 2000 signatures with the following terms of reference:

“We, the undersigned, urgently request the Council of the London Borough of Harrow and NHS Harrow to reinstate the Admiral Nursing Service in Harrow. Admiral Nurses provide a unique and crucial service for Residents who have any form of Dementia, and their carers.”

Following consideration of public question 1 and Councillor question 4, including the hearing of the statement at Minutes 383 and 384, the following was agreed.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               Cabinet notes the petition signed by over 2000 residents which indicates the need for a proper integrated health and social care service to cope with the needs of the elderly and frail people and their carers, in particular, those with dementia;

(2)               Cabinet further notes that the Harrow Strategic Partnership has adopted a borough-wide joint Dementia Strategy and supports this joint work; the Department of Health has allocated dedicated funding to provide advice and support for memory services; the new reablement services help identify dementia sufferers earlier; Harrow is one of the top performing Councils for providing support for carers;

(3)               notwithstanding this Cabinet believes proper care of the elderly can only be solved at national level;

(4)               Cabinet therefore instructs the Chief Executive to write to Harrow’s three MPs and the GLA Member for Brent and Harrow (i) informing them of the above and (ii) drawing their attention for the need for a comprehensive National Care Service and asks that they lobby for a positive outcome arising from the government’s consideration of the Dilnot report in the forthcoming Social Care White Paper.

[Call-in does not apply].

The Call-in Sub-Committee held on 28 February 2012 upheld the Call-in notice received in relation to mobile and flexible working on the grounds of inadequate consultation with stakeholders prior to the decision.

The decision is therefore referred back to Cabinet for re-consideration. Papers, including a reference report from the Call-in Sub-Committee, will be circulated on a supplemental agenda.

RESOLVED:  That, having re-considered the decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 9 February 2012, as set out at Appendix 3 to the report, in relation to the Transformation Programme and Mobile and Flexible Working, as a result of the decision of the Call-in Sub-Committee, the original Cabinet decision of 9 February 2012 be confirmed.

Reason for Decision:  In accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 46.8.3, to reconsider the decision within 10 clear working days of a referral by the Call-In Sub-Committee.

[Call-in does not apply.]

The Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services referred to the report, which set out the decision of the Call-in Sub?Committee following the consideration of the Call-in Notice in relation to the decision of Cabinet on 9 February on the Transformation Programme Mobile and Flexible Working.  He added that one of the two Call-in grounds – the absence of adequate evidence on which to base a decision – was not upheld due to insufficient grounds.  However, the Call-in ground of inadequate consultation with stakeholders prior to the decision had been upheld.  He agreed that whilst consultation should have taken place, he believed the way forward for Cabinet was to re-affirm its previous decision, as detailed reports on the proposals would be the subject of further discussions.

RESOLVED:  That, having re-considered the decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 9 February 2012, as set out at Appendix 3 to the report, in relation to the Transformation Programme and Mobile and Flexible Working, as a result of the decision of the Call-in Sub-Committee, the original Cabinet decision of 9 February 2012 be confirmed.

Reason for Decision:  In accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 46.8.3, to reconsider the decision within 10 clear working days of a referral by the Call-In Sub-Committee.

[Call-in does not apply].

Report of the Assistant Chief Executive.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               Portfolio Holders continue working with officers to achieve improvement against identified key challenges;

(2)               the report be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To note performance against key measures and to identify and assign corrective action where necessary.

The Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services introduced the report, which summarised Council and service performance against key measures and drew attention to areas requiring action.  He was pleased to report that performance in many areas was exceptional, particularly at a time when the Council was facing many challenges.  He accepted that some of the information could be better presented.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               Portfolio Holders continue working with officers to achieve improvement against identified key challenges;

(2)               the report be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To note performance against key measures and to identify and assign corrective action where necessary.

Appendix to the Report of the Interim Corporate Director Resources.

RESOLVED:  That the responses recommended by officers be endorsed and that a further progress report be submitted in three months’ time.

Reason for Decision:  To provide an appropriate response to the Scrutiny recommendations and to improve the effectiveness of the handling of exceptional cases.

Cabinet received a report of the Interim Corporate Director Resources setting out a preliminary response to the recommendations of the Scrutiny Challenge Panel on the DebtRecovery Process.

The Leader of the Council welcomed the Chairman of the Challenge Panel and the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to the meeting and invited them to address the meeting.

The Chairman of the Challenge Panel informed Cabinet that the Panel had considered the application of the Council’s debt recovery process and had examined examples of where the Council appeared to be applying its policy, in the Panel’s opinion, in a manner which did not fully take account of potential distressing personal circumstances of some residents.  A blanket application of the policies could, in the Panel’s view, become harmful although it was recognised that it was critical for the Council to collect the money owed to it.  However, the Panel considered that there needed to be some form of encouragement in the process that would also assist residents.

The Challenge Panel had been of the view that the process of applying severe sanctions had not been carefully considered, particularly where these impacted on residents in difficult financial circumstances.  Capturing residents in trouble earlier in the process was essential.  The Chairman of the Panel suggested that before severe sanctions were taken, the circumstances and vulnerability of the individual ought to be examined with care, as sanctions applied would result in life time changes for the individual concerned.  Additionally, there were opportunities for the Council to streamline the debt collection functions, looking to reduce cost, improve collection rates of some of the smaller collection functions.

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee welcomed the response report, and thanked the Chairman of the Challenge Panel for leading a robust review.  He added that he also felt that the Council needed to appreciate that a number of factors could result in a non-payment situation.  Furthermore, a streamlining of the debt collection function would help save money and he hoped that the recommendations of the Challenge Panel would help enhance the service and processes applied.

The Leader of the Council thanked the Members for their contributions and acknowledged that debt recovery was an emotive issue.  When compared with other local authorities, Harrow Council’s policy on debt recovery could not be considered to over-zealous.  However, he acknowledged that early intervention in the process was critical and suggested a working group be established that could oversee this process.  Moreover, it was important that the policies were applied in a reasonable, sensitive and proportionate manner.  He agreed that a progress report be submitted in three months’ time.

RESOLVED:  That the responses recommended by officers be endorsed and that a further progress report be submitted in three months’ time.

Reason for Decision:  To provide an appropriate response to the Scrutiny recommendations and to improve the effectiveness of the handling of exceptional cases.

Report of the Divisional Director Housing Services.

RESOLVED:  That the “Yes” Vote for changing the Locata (Housing Services) Company Memorandum and Articles be approved.

Reason for Decision:  To allow for distribution of profits amongst the members, appointment of specialist directors to add relevant skills to the Company’s Board and simplify Director voting rights.

The Portfolio Holder for Housing introduced the report, which sought approval for the Council, as a member of the Locata Housing Services (LHS) Ltd, to vote to amend the existing Company Memorandum and Articles to allow, inter alia, the distribution of profits amongst members.  He outlined the objectives of the LHS and it was noted that the LHS was made up of four local authorities and three Housing Associations to manage social housing lettings through an IT solution that matched housing applicants to available vacant homes.  The LHS was a successful body and had given the Council access to cutting edge technology.  The Portfolio Holder commended the report to Cabinet.

RESOLVED:  That the “Yes” Vote for changing the Locata (Housing Services) Company Memorandum and Articles be approved.

Reason for Decision:  To allow for distribution of profits amongst the members, appointment of specialist directors to add relevant skills to the Company’s Board and simplify Director voting rights.

Report of the Divisional Director Adult Social Care.

RESOLVED:  That the response to the recommendations from the Standing Scrutiny Review on the Reablement Service be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To provide an appropriate response to the Scrutiny recommendations.

[Call-in does not apply.]

Cabinet received a report of the Divisional Director Adult Social Care setting out the responses to the recommendations from the Standing Scrutiny Review.

The Corporate Director Community, Health and Wellbeing referred to the five recommendations from the Scrutiny Review and explained that the majority of these had been taken on board.  He invited the Chairman of the Scrutiny Review Group for a discussion outside of this meeting, if needed.

RESOLVED:  That the response to the recommendations from the Standing Scrutiny Review on the Reablement Service be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To provide an appropriate response to the Scrutiny recommendations.

[Call-in does not apply].

Report of the Corporate Director Community, Health and Wellbeing.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               £74,000 be ring-fenced from the Main Grants budget to fund the commissioning of an infrastructure support service for the Third Sector;

(2)               37 grant applications be awarded grant funding at the levels outlined in paragraph 2.2.1 of the report, subject to:

(a)               receipt of satisfactory references and supporting documents from applicants two weeks after notification of the grant funding decision;

(b)               completion of the appeals procedure and any changes to the amounts awarded necessitated by decisions on appeals.

(3)               applications with a score below the threshold agreed for grant funding be placed on a reserve list.

(4)               authority be delegated to the Corporate Director Community, Health and Well-Being, in conjunction with the Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services, to:

(i)                 withdraw grant offers where organisations do not comply with the conditions of grant funding as detailed in (2) above;

(ii)               award available funds to organisations on the reserve list in order of highest scores achieved if sufficient funds become available (where scores are tied, funding will only be distributed when sufficient funding is available to fund all projects with the same score);

(iii)             vary the threshold and percentage award as appropriate in light of new information.

(5)               authority be delegated to the Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services and the  Divisional Director of Community and Culture to consider and determine appeals, in consultation with an Independent Adviser appointed to advise the Portfolio Holder and Director on those appeals and in the presence of an independent observer nominated from the Harrow Voluntary and Community sector; and the delegation of authority to the Divisional Director of Community and Culture, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Community and Culture to vary both the percentage of the grant awarded and the scoring range within which grants are allocated, in the light of decisions on appeals.

Reason for Decision:  To award funding from the Main Grants Programme to Third Sector organisations to support them in delivering their services in 2012/13.

The Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services introduced the report, which set out grant funding recommendations from the main Grants Programme 2012/13.  The report also included the recommendations of the Grants Advisory Panel.

The Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services added that a total of 78 applications had been received, which equated to requests for funding in the region of £1.5m.  The Portfolio Holder was pleased to report that the amount of funding had not been reduced from the previous year and that a sum of £669,000 was available for 2012/13.  He added that the process applied had been transparent and had included a full Equalities Impact Assessment.  Moreover, officers had ensured that the assessments conducted had been carried out in a fair and informed manner.  Additionally, external observers from the Voluntary Sector had been invited to the Assessment Panel meetings held.  The feedback from the external observers had been positive and they had commended the process adopted.  Furthermore, the Voluntary Sector had been well supported with workshops being offered to the applicants, including a 1-1 telephone advice service for those groups that required further support.

The Portfolio Holder informed Cabinet that in allocating grant funding, the Council wished to:

·                     recognise and reward excellence of application and therefore a two-tier funding was being recommended whereby the high scoring applications would receive a larger percentage of funding;

·                     ensure the widest possible spread across by offering a small grants fund and a large grants fund to ensure that as many organisations as possible were funded;

whilst taking into account the deliverability of projects.

The Portfolio Holder outlined examples of the administration’s passion for the work carried out by the Voluntary Sector and advised that approximately 60,000 people of all ages and special requirements would benefit from the successful applications.  In commending the report to Cabinet, the Portfolio Holder thanked the Divisional Director Community and Culture and her staff for their work in ensuring a successful and transparent process.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               £74,000 be ring-fenced from the Main Grants budget to fund the commissioning of an infrastructure support service for the Third Sector;

(2)               37 grant applications be awarded grant funding at the levels outlined in paragraph 2.2.1 of the report, subject to:

(a)               receipt of satisfactory references and supporting documents from applicants two weeks after notification of the grant funding decision;

(b)               completion of the appeals procedure and any changes to the amounts awarded necessitated by decisions on appeals.

(3)               applications with a score below the threshold agreed for grant funding be placed on a reserve list.

(4)               authority be delegated to the Corporate Director Community, Health and Well-Being, in conjunction with the Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services, to:

(i)                 withdraw grant offers where organisations do not comply with the conditions of grant funding as detailed in (2) above;

(ii)               award available funds to organisations on the reserve list in order of highest scores achieved if sufficient funds become available (where scores are tied, funding will only be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 395.

Joint report of the Corporate Directors Community, Health and Wellbeing and Environment.

RESOLVED:  That the following be approved:

(1)               the appointment of Linbrook Services Ltd and Slade (London) Ltd as contractors to the framework for the provision of Responsive Repairs Services for Housing:;

(2)               the retender of the Corporate Works for responsive repairs for up to two years pending a full OJEU procurement exercise;

(3)               the relevant Corporate Director, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder,be authorised to take all necessary steps to enter into an interim responsive repairs contract for corporate works on such terms as s/he shall determine.

Reason for Decision:  The evaluation of the tenders received was conducted to arrive at the most economically advantageous bids.  The Framework structure was designed to maintain a degree of competitiveness and resilience throughout the 4-year framework period.  However, the lack of competitive responses for the Corporate Works meant that no clear value for money result could be demonstrated.  To enable the Corporate Director to put in place the necessary interim arrangements commencing on 1 July 2012.

Cabinet considered a joint report of the Corporate Directors Community, Health and Wellbeing and Community and Environment, together with a confidential appendix, which set out the results of the tender process for the provision of general repair services to corporate buildings and housing stock, including an analysis of the tenders received.

The Portfolio Holder for Housing set out the process since September 2011 when Cabinet initially agreed to re-tender the repairs and maintenance service.  He added that, in total, 12 bidders had expressed an interest and were invited to tender for the works and eight bids were received.  Of the eight bids, four passed the quality of proposed service delivery threshold assessment which required bidders to score at least 60% overall and 60% in Customer Care.  The procurement process was in compliance with the requirement of the Public Procurement law.

The Portfolio Holder thanked all those who had been involved in bringing this project to fruition, particularly the Divisional Director Housing Services and her staff and the representatives of the Tenants’ and Residents’ Associations whose contributions had been acknowledged in writing.

The Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts was complimentary of the role played by residents whose knowledge and experience of the difficulties faced was of immense value in moving this project forward.

The Divisional Director Environmental Services drew Cabinet’s attention to an additional recommendation circulated with the supplemental agenda, which would allow for the appointment of corporate works to proceed.

RESOLVED:  That the following be approved:

(1)               the appointment of Linbrook Services Ltd and Slade (London) Ltd as contractors to the framework for the provision of Responsive Repairs Services for Housing;

(2)               the retender of the Corporate Works for responsive repairs for up to two years pending a full OJEU procurement exercise;

(3)               the relevant Corporate Director, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder,be authorised to take all necessary steps to enter into an interim responsive repairs contract for corporate works on such terms as s/he shall determine.

Reason for Decision:  The evaluation of the tenders received was conducted to arrive at the most economically advantageous bids.  The Framework structure was designed to maintain a degree of competitiveness and resilience throughout the 4-year framework period.  However, the lack of competitive responses for the Corporate Works meant that no clear value for money result could be demonstrated.  To enable the Corporate Director to put in place the necessary interim arrangements commencing on 1 July 2012.

Report of the Corporate Director Place Shaping.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               Harrow Council enter into a funding agreement with the Greater London Authority (GLA) in respect of Round Two of the Outer London Fund, in order to deliver the programme of improvements for Harrow Town Centre;

(2)               the Corporate Director Place Shaping, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Development and Enterprise, be authorised to enter into the funding agreement with the GLA.

Reason for Decision: By entering into a funding agreement with the GLA, Harrow Council will receive a sum up to £1,758,750 for Harrow Town Centre, which will be matched by £300,000 from the Council’s Capital Programme. The funds provide a means to deliver the Corporate Priority of “Supporting our Town Centre, our local shopping centres and businesses”, and to take forward the Core Strategy and emerging Area Action Plan for the Heart of Harrow.

Cabinet received a report of the Corporate Director Place Shaping, which set out the rationale for entering into an Agreement with the Mayor of London, acting through the Greater London Authority (GLA), to secure money from Round Two of the Outer London Fund to support Harrow Town Centre.  The Portfolio Holder explained that approval was required to enter into a funding arrangement which would bring in up to £1.75m for Harrow Town Centre, and he commended the report to Cabinet.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               Harrow Council enter into a funding agreement with the Greater London Authority (GLA) in respect of Round Two of the Outer London Fund, in order to deliver the programme of improvements for Harrow Town Centre;

(2)               the Corporate Director Place Shaping, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Development and Enterprise, be authorised to enter into the funding agreement with the GLA.

Reason for Decision:  By entering into a funding agreement with the GLA, Harrow Council will receive a sum up to £1,758,750 for Harrow Town Centre, which will be matched by £300,000 from the Council’s Capital Programme. The funds provide a means to deliver the Corporate Priority of “Supporting our Town Centre, our local shopping centres and businesses”, and to take forward the Core Strategy and emerging Area Action Plan for the Heart of Harrow.

Report of the Divisional Director Planning Services.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the Local Development Order (LDO), annexed at Appendix A to the report, be submitted to the Secretary of State for consideration;

(2)               subject to no adverse comments being received from the Secretary of State, the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Development and Enterprise be authorised to adopt the LDO for a period of three years;

(3)               it be noted that there would be monitoring and review of the Order at the end of 12 months.

Reason for Decision:  To enable the implementation of the Local Development Order in North Harrow District Shopping Centre to support the regeneration of this important District Shopping Centre in line with the Corporate Priorities of supporting our town centres and businesses.

The Portfolio Holder for Planning, Development and Enterprise introduced the report setting out the outcome of the public consultation exercise carried out on the Draft Local Development Order (LDO) for North Harrow District Shopping Centre.  It was noted that the aim of the LDO was to encourage businesses to relocate to North Harrow in the knowledge that the process for obtaining consent for uses would be more certain.

The Portfolio Holder added that subject to Cabinet approval, and prior to adoption, the LDO would be submitted to the Secretary of State whose approval was required as he could ask for a modification of the LDO.  He added that 2,000 letters had been sent to local residents and the majority of those who had replied had supported the principle of the LDO.  It was intended to monitor and review the impact of the LDO, as referred to in the recommendation from the Local Development Framework Panel meeting which had met the previous evening.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the Local Development Order (LDO), annexed at Appendix A to the report, be submitted to the Secretary of State for consideration;

(2)               subject to no adverse comments being received from the Secretary of State, the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Development and Enterprise be authorised to adopt the LDO for a period of three years;

(3)               it be noted that there would be monitoring and review of the Order at the end of 12 months.

Reason for Decision:  To enable the implementation of the Local Development Order in North Harrow District Shopping Centre to support the regeneration of this important District Shopping Centre in line with the Corporate Priorities of supporting our town centres and businesses.

Report of the Corporate Director Place Shaping.

RESOLVED:  That in addition to the freehold disposal of the development site at Wood Farm, previously authorised by Cabinet, the Corporate Director Place Shaping, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts be authorised:

(1)               to consider and determine any objection to the disposals, arising from the Statutory Open   Space Advertising;

(2)               subject to (1) above, dispose of the Council’s freehold interest in Pear Wood Cottages; and

(3)               subject to (1) above, enter into a 35 year fixed term lease of approximately 7.3 acres of Ten Acre Field, as shown on the plan attached to the addendum tabled at the meeting;

in each case for the best consideration reasonably obtainable.

Reason for Decision:  To secure public access to a significant area of Green Belt land to be incorporated into an enlarged Stanmore Country Park and receive a substantial capital receipt budgeted within the Medium Term Finance Strategy (MTFS) for 2011/2012.

[Call-in does not apply.]

Following consideration of public questions 6-13 and 15-20, including Councillor question 7, together with the statement of the Corporate Director Place Shaping, Minutes 383 and 384 refer, Cabinet considered the substantive item on Wood Farm, Wood Lane, Stanmore - Pear Wood Cottages and Ten Acre Field, as set out below.

Cabinet received a report of Corporate Director Place Shaping, which set out amendments to the resolutions authorised by Cabinet in October 2008, in respect of Wood Farm, by additionally proposing the disposal of the former Pear Wood Cottages and the grant of a lease of the adjacent field known as Ten Acre Field.  Additionally, Cabinet received an addendum to the report which was tabled at the meeting, setting out further information following engagement with representatives from Harrow Nature Conservation Forum, subsequent to their response to the Open Space Notice, enquiries from Cabinet Members and further negotiation with the proposed purchaser.  The addendum also included a revised recommendation 3, to lease approximately 7.3 acres of Ten Acre Field, and an additional recommendation 4 for consideration by Cabinet.

The Leader of the Council referred to the decision before Cabinet and acknowledged that this would be a difficult decision.  The Leader outlined his ambitions and aspirations for Wood Farm, which was to open up it up to the public to enjoy, including the views across London, and that some ten years on from the Council’s original consideration of the matter, there was an opportunity to do this, as there was a potential purchaser.

The Leader added that he was of the view that Pear Wood Cottages and a part of Ten Acre Field should be part of a revised commercial proposal, however, he was not supportive of the prospective purchaser leasing part of Ten Acre Field in the event that the Government Office (Secretary of State) refused to endorse the disposal of Pear Wood Cottages.

The Corporate Director Place Shaping offered to have discussions with the Harrow Nature Conservation Forum regarding nature conservation issues across the entire site.

RESOLVED:  That in addition to the freehold disposal of the development site at Wood Farm, previously authorised by Cabinet, the Corporate Director Place Shaping, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts be authorised:

(1)               to consider and determine any objection to the disposals, arising from the Statutory Open Space Advertising;

(2)               subject to (1) above, dispose of the Council’s freehold interest in Pear Wood Cottages; and

(3)               subject to (1) above, enter into a 35 year fixed term lease of approximately 7.3 acres of Ten Acre Field, as shown on the plan attached to the addendum tabled at the meeting;

in each case for the best consideration reasonably obtainable.

Reason for Decision:  To secure public access to a significant area of Green Belt land to be incorporated into an enlarged Stanmore Country Park and receive a substantial capital receipt budgeted within the Medium Term Finance Strategy (MTFS) for 2011/2012.

[Call-in does not apply].

In accordance with the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 9.2 (Part 4B of the Constitution) it was

RESOLVED:  At 9.50 pm to continue until 10.30 pm or earlier upon the conclusion of business.

RESOLVED:  That, in accordance with Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item for the reason set out below:

Appendix II to the joint report of the Corporate Directors Community, Health and Wellbeing and Environment at item 15 above.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Reason for Decision: To allow the appendix to be considered in conjunction with the main report at agenda item 15.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Reason for Decision: To allow the appendix to be considered in conjunction with the main report at agenda item 15.