Agenda, decisions and minutes

The Leader of the Council, in opening the meeting, said that due to a recently acquired medical condition, he had not been able to Chair last month’s Cabinet meeting.  It was the first Cabinet meeting he had missed and was grateful to Councillor Idaikkadar, his Deputy, for chairing the September Cabinet meeting and for taking over several of his other functions.

The Leader of the Council added that independent of his medical condition, he had intended to stand down as Leader but that his condition had hastened this process and that this meeting would be his last Cabinet meeting.  He thanked residents, partners, Council staff, Councillors from all political parties for their best wishes.

The Leader of the Council stated that it had been a great privilege and honour to chair Cabinet where there had been much change and good progress, culminating in the “Best Achieving Council of the Year” award.  The Leader thanked his Cabinet colleagues for their work, support and trust.  He thanked Michael Lockwood, Chief Executive, who he stated was immensely respected and liked. He also thanked the Corporate Directors and staff who were working in difficult and challenging times.  The Leader paid tribute to all the work behind the scenes by Democratic and Electoral Services, guardians of the dignity of Cabinet and meetings in general, and the clerk to Cabinet for all her work, in particular, as a stalwart guardian of all that Cabinet did.

In concluding the business on the agenda, the Leader of the Council thanked representatives of the local press, colleagues from the Trade Unions, various Councillors, both past and present, for attending and staying until the end of the meeting.

The Deputy Leader of the Council took this opportunity to pay a tribute to the outgoing Leader of the Council.  The Deputy Leader stated that Councillor Stephenson was highly regarded, not just by the Labour Group but also by the opposition and other independent Councillors in Harrow.  He was committed and passionate and that his attention to detail was legendary.  It was difficult not to be impressed by Councillor Stephenson’s knowledge, experience and dedication to Harrow and this job which he delivered with charm.  He hoped that the Council would continue to benefit from his experience and wise counsel even from the backbenches.

The Deputy Leader added that he had never heard a negative comment about Councillor Stephenson’s performance and work ethics.  Most people would say that he had improved Harrow Council, he was sincere in his beliefs and the Council should feel immensely proud of the achievements under him.  The Deputy Leader wished Councillor Stephenson and his family well for the future and hoped that the family would have more time to visit art galleries and enjoy the finer things in life. 

Councillor Susan Hall, Leader of the Conservative Group, said that she was sad that Councillor Stephenson was standing down as Leader due to poor health and she hoped that he would be back.   Councillor Hall added that she  ...  view the full minutes text for item 500.

The Leader of the Council announced that he wished to make a statement to Cabinet, as follows:

“Following serious allegations, Councillor Brian Gate had resigned from his post as Cabinet Member for Children, Schools and Families and had been temporarily replaced by Councillor Mitzi Green.  The Labour Group would choose a permanent successor at some time in the near future.  I would like to welcome Councillor Green back to Cabinet.  She has a wealth of experience having previously been the Council’s Cabinet Member for Children’s Services up until last May.

Given that there was an ongoing police investigation, any comments about these allegations during this evening’s meeting would be wholly inappropriate and I ask every Member and any Councillors or members of the public asking questions to bear that in mind.”

The Leader of the Council submitted Councillor O’Dell’s apologies, as he was attending an awards ceremony in which the new Mollison Way/Ellement Close had been shortlisted for an award. 

The Leader welcomed Caroline Bruce, Corporate Director for Environment and Enterprise, to her first Cabinet meeting.

The Leader announced that, with Cabinet’s agreement, he would be taking the following items after agenda item 6 in the order set out below:

Agenda Item 19(a) and 21 – Public Realm Integrated Services Model:Business Case – referral by Call-in Sub-Committee;

Agenda Item 14 – Response to Scrutiny Review of Private Rented Sector Housing in Harrow’.

RESOLVED: That the order of the agenda be amended.

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 – Special School SEN Placements Planning Framework

Councillor Graham Henson declared a personal interest in that he was a governor of Alexander School, which was mentioned in the report.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Agenda Item 12 – Shared Public Health Service Target Operating Model

Councillors Chris and Janet Mote declared interests in that their daughter was a paediatric nurse.  They would remain in the room to listen to the debate on this item.

That the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 13 September 2012 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 13 September 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 note that the following petitions had been received:

1.                  Warrington Road – Resurfacing and Repaving

Councillor David Perry presented a petition signed by 93 residents with the following terms of reference:

“We the undersigned residents of Warrington Road urge Harrow Council to resurface the roads and pavements in Warrington Road.  The reason why we believe the roads and pavements in Warrington Road need resurfacing are as follows:

·                    the pavements are cracked and uneven along both sides of the street.  This makes it very hazardous for pedestrians;

·                    the road surface is in need of repair;

·                    there is extraordinary high camber, which scrapes and damages the underside of cars when pulling into driveways;

·                    the surrounding roads have all received repairs works and Warrington Road has not had any repairs for many years.

We urge Harrow Council to take immediate action.”

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.

2.                  Durley Avenue, Pinner – Relocation of residents at 38 Durley Avenue

A local resident, Ms Jenkins, presented a petition signed by 120 residents with the following terms of reference:

“We the undersigned residents of Durley Avenue, Pinner, hereby call upon Harrow Churches Housing Association and Harrow Council to relocate the residents at No. 38 Durley Avenue, Pinner, to a more appropriate location for the occupation of No. 38 to return to a normal domestic dwelling.

This is vitally important to put an end to the persistent anti social behaviour of the tenants at No. 38 Durley Avenue which has occurred since No. 38 was converted, and to safeguard the interests of residents of Durley Avenue, many of whom are elderly or are families with young children.”

RESOLVED:  That the petition be received and referred to the Corporate Director of Community, Health and Wellbeing and the Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing.

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 8 October 2012. 

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.

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 8 October 2012].

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

1.

The Leader of the Councillor informed Cabinet that the report relating to ‘Climate Change Strategy’ had been deferred to November 2012 Cabinet meeting.  He added that the item on ‘Housing Act 2004 – Charges for Enforcement Action’ had been deferred as the matter would be incorporated in the Fees and Charges report.

RESOLVED:  To note the contents of the Key Decision Schedule for October 2012.

For consideration

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

Report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Council)

That the contents of the Youth Justice Plan be agreed and the Plan be recommended to Council for approval.

RESOLVED:  That the Improvement Plan be agreed.

Reason for Decision:  Effective delivery of Youth Justice Services was a statutory function.  The Council must take political as well as Corporate responsibility for ensuring that rapid improvements were secured.

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 the Recommendation to Council].

Cabinet received a report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families, which set out how the Youth Offending Team (YOT) would be resourced and the services that would be available in relation to the statutory primary aim of YOTs to prevent youth offending in the area.

The Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families referred to a Council priority which was the protection of vulnerable children and adults.  The report set out the strategic plan to ensure effective outcomes for children and young people who offended or were at risk of offending.  She stated that the Plan needed to be submitted to Council for approval.

The Corporate Director of Children and Families referred to the findings of the 2011 inspection of the service, which had been poor, and the plan for securing improvements.  The Corporate Director added that the results of the inspection were of great concern as it had placed Harrow below the national and London averages and that major challenges lay ahead.

In order to meet these challenges, a fundamental reorganisation of the Directorate had taken place, a smaller focused Youth Offending Team had been created with a new permanent team and service manager.  Extra resources had been allocated to this area and work with the Youth Justice Board was in place.  In addition, representation on the YOT Management Board had been strengthened to ensure robust challenge and scrutiny.  Moreover, the relocation of staff into a single site would ensure closer working relationships amongst staff responsible for this area as a whole.

The Corporate Director stated that the challenges that lay ahead had not been underestimated and the trajectory to ensuring progress was contained in the Improvement Plan to help improve outcome for children and young people in Harrow.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Council)

That the contents of the Youth Justice Plan be agreed and the Plan be recommended to Council for approval.

RESOLVED:  Thatthe Improvement Plan be agreed.

Reason for Decision:  Effective delivery of Youth Justice Services was a statutory function.  The Council must take political as well as Corporate responsibility for ensuring that rapid improvements were secured.

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 the Recommendation to Council].

Report of the Corporate Director of Place Shaping.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Council)

That the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Draft Charging Schedule, at Appendix 1 to the report, be approved for a six week period of public consultation in accordance with the Council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the representations made to the CIL Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and the Council’s response to these at Appendix 2 to the report be noted;

(2)               authority be delegated to the Divisional Director of Planning, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regeneration, to make any minor changes to the CIL Draft Charging Schedule resulting from the consultation, prior to its submission for Examination in Public.

Reason for Decision:  To progress with preparing and adopting a CIL Charging Schedule that would enable the Council to charge CIL on new development to help pay for social and physical infrastructure within the borough. 

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 the Recommendation to Council].

The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regeneration introduced the report, which summarised the comments received to consultation on the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and the Council’s response to these in preparing the Draft Charging Schedule for a further round of consultation prior to submission for Examination in Public.

The Portfolio Holder added that the CIL followed from and in future would replace Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act, to support the delivery of strategic infrastructure. The scope of Section 106 would be reduced to addressing site specific requirements only, including affordable housing.   He added that local authorities had until 2014 to introduce CIL for strategic infrastructure after which they would not be allowed to continue to use S106 agreements in the same way.

The Portfolio Holder added that the CIL was driven by a viability assessment and that Harrow’s charge was determined having regard to this requirement.  He added that surrounding boroughs were progressing charges in excess of Harrow. 

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (to Council)

That the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Draft Charging Schedule, at Appendix 1 to the report, be approved for a six week period of public consultation in accordance with the Council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the representations made to the CIL Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and the Council’s response to these at Appendix 2 to the report be noted;

(2)               authority be delegated to the Divisional Director of Planning, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regeneration, to make any minor changes to the CIL Draft Charging Schedule resulting from the consultation, prior to its submission for Examination in Public.

Reason for Decision:  To progress with preparing and adopting a CIL Charging Schedule that would enable the Council to charge CIL on new development to help pay for social and physical infrastructure within the borough. 

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 the Recommendation to Council].

Report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families.

RESOLVED:  That the post-Ofsted Improvement Plan be agreed.

Reason for Decision:  To meet the requirements of Ofsted, which was the independent regulator of Children’s Services.  To take political as well as Corporate responsibility for ensuring that rapid improvements were secured.

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 key issues arising from the Ofsted Inspection of Safeguarding and Looked After Children’s Services carried out in May 2012.  The report made reference to the setting up of an Improvement Board to secure rapid improvements through an Improvement Plan agreed by all partners.

The Corporate Director of Children and Families referred to the Ofsted Inspection which was cross cutting across all partners and which came at the end of a four year cycle of all local authorities in England.  She added that Harrow had been in the final cohort and its performance was judged as adequate.  It was noted that a number of local authorities had failed their inspections and were subject to ‘intervention’.

The Corporate Director added that challenges had been recognised prior to the inspection.  As a result, a New Operating Model had been launched in February 2012, three months before the inspection.  In addition, an Improvement Board had been convened to secure rapid improvements through an Improvement Plan which addressed the 22 recommendations in the Ofsted Inspection report.  The multi-agency team had developed robust quality assurance, developed a comprehensive workforce strategy and appointed a new manager for safeguarding.  Officers were also working closely with the Councillors, Portfolio Holders and Conservative Group Shadow Portfolio Holders.

Cabinet was informed that relationships in the partnership had improved significantly but that the team was not complacent as much work needed to be done.  The Corporate Director introduced Javina Sehgal, Harrow Borough Director of NHS Brent and Harrow PCT, to the meeting.

Javina Sehgal reported that the relationship amongst the partners was robust and the ‘direction of travel’ was correct.  Ms Sehgal welcomed the appointment of an independent Chair which had brought a sharper focus on the work of the Local Safeguarding Children Board.  Additionally, health involvement in the Corporate Parenting Panel was also welcomed.  She added that the partners had aspirations to move forward with better outcomes for children and with a view to looking at the bigger picture.  Improvements were underway but it was acknowledged that there was a long way to go, including the appreciation of the changes in health.

The Chief Executive addressed Cabinet and commended the Children and Families Directorate which provided outstanding schooling in the borough and the adoption service which was the best amongst local authorities.  However, the inspection had shown that there was more work to do and the Council was not complacent in this regard.  He added that an improvement journey had commenced and actions had been identified to ensure that children were provided with best life chances.  The report would be submitted to scrutiny and contributions from other Councillors would be invited.

The Chief Executive added that he would be taking a keen interest in this matter and that this was an issue for the partners who were committed to better outcomes.

The Leader of the Council endorsed the views of the Chief Executive and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 513.

Report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the aims and guiding principles for the Special School SEN Placements Planning Framework be agreed;

(2)               to develop options to increase provision in special schools and mainstream schools to meet growing demand, a wide stakeholder engagement and consultation be agreed;

(3)               the Corporate Director of Children and Families, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families, be authorised to explore opportunities for collaborations with schools, other boroughs and/or a Free School provider to contribute to the increase in provision and submit a Free School application if required by the Department for Education;

(4)               the outcome of the consultation be reported in Spring 2013 for Cabinet to agree its Special School Special Educational Needs (SEN) Placements Planning Framework with a view to bringing forward any necessary statutory proposals.

Reason for Decision:  To undertake a consultation on proposals to increase provision for pupils with SEN.

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 draft Special School Special Educational Needs (SEN) Placements Planning Framework and a series of options to increase capacity in provision for SEN need in Harrow.

The Head of Services (Education Strategy and School Organisation) referred to a former decision of Cabinet to increase places in schools.  He added that there was now a need to increase places for children with special needs and a number of options needed to be explored.  He informed Cabinet that the results of the consultation on the Framework at appendix A to the report would be reported to Cabinet in Spring 2013 and that it was essential that there was engagement with parents.  Cabinet was also informed that recommendation 3 was being proposed due to the ‘fast moving landscape’ and in anticipation of Free Schools being proposed.

In welcoming the report, the Leader of the Council moved that any delegation should be in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the aims and guiding principles for the Special School SEN Placements Planning Framework be agreed;

(2)               to develop options to increase provision in special schools and mainstream schools to meet growing demand, a wide stakeholder engagement and consultation be agreed;

(3)               the Corporate Director of Children and Families, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families, be authorised to explore opportunities for collaborations with schools, other boroughs and/or a Free School provider to contribute to the increase in provision and submit a Free School application if required by the Department for Education;

(4)               the outcome of the consultation be reported in Spring 2013 for Cabinet to agree its Special School Special Educational Needs (SEN) Placements Planning Framework with a view to bringing forward any necessary statutory proposals.

Reason for Decision:  To undertake a consultation on proposals to increase provision for pupils with SEN.

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.

Joint report of the Corporate Directors of Children and Families and Place Shaping.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the Council’s Position Statement on Academy Schools and Free Schools be agreed;

(2)               the Corporate Director of Children and Families, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families, be authorised to negotiate and sign a Commercial Transfer Agreement (CTA) with the school/sponsor in relation to assets, third party contracts, staffing and information transfer when schools convert to Academy status;

(3)               the Corporate Director of Place Shaping, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts, be authorised to determine the terms of the land transfer based on the model 125 year lease issued by the Department for Education (DfE), including the extent of the school premises and licences for land outside of the lease arrangements;

(4)               the relevant Corporate Director, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, be authorised to negotiate and enter into contract for services with Academies and out of borough schools in accordance with the Position Statement.

Reason for Decision:  To ensure that the Council was able to manage conversions efficiently in accordance with the government’s policy, it was expected that more schools in Harrow would consider and convert to Academy School status.

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 to manage future Academy School conversions due to there being cross-Council implications for the conversion process.  Academy and Free Schools were part of the government’s policy to improve standards and increase choice for parents.  There were nine Academies in Harrow and one Free School. 

The Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts stated that it was intended to follow the government’s model of 125 year lease in transferring school premises.  In order to ensure consistency, the previous models would apply.

The Leader of the Council stated that the relevant Portfolio Holder should be consulted when negotiating and entering into a contract for services with Academies.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the Council’s Position Statement on Academy Schools and Free Schools be agreed;

(2)               the Corporate Director of Children and Families, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families, be authorised to negotiate and sign a Commercial Transfer Agreement (CTA) with the school/sponsor in relation to assets, third party contracts, staffing and information transfer when schools convert to Academy status;

(3)               the Corporate Director of Place Shaping, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts, be authorised to determine the terms of the land transfer based on the model 125 year lease issued by the Department for Education (DfE), including the extent of the school premises and licences for land outside of the lease arrangements;

(4)               the relevant Corporate Director, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, be authorised to negotiate and enter into contract for services with Academies and out of borough schools in accordance with the Position Statement.

Reason for Decision:  To ensure that the Council was able to manage conversions efficiently in accordance with the government’s policy, it was expected that more schools in Harrow would consider and convert to Academy School status.

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)               the agreement for Harrow to host the Shared Public Health Team be noted;

(2)               the appointment of the shared Director of Public Health be noted;

(3)               the Barnet and Harrow Public Health Target Operating Model be approved ‘in principle’;

(4)               the NHS proposed structure for the shared Public Health Service be noted;

(5)               it be noted that the NHS North West London (NWL) and NHS North Central London (NCL) were consulting NHS Public Health staff on the proposed structure during October 2012;

(6)               the proposed structure for the Shared Service for Harrow Council and Barnet Council be adopted from 1 April 2013;

(7)               authority be delegated to the Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing to accept any changes to the structure as a result of the NHS consultation.

Reason for Decision:  To implement the required transfer of Public Health to Local Government.

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 Community, Health and Wellbeing, which provided an update on the process and appointment of the Shared Director of Public Health, the development of the shared Target Operating Model, the proposed shared Public Health structure and an update on the development of the Inter Authority Agreement.

The Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing added that the three strands to the report also included an ‘in principle’ decision for Harrow to host the shared Public Health Service when these transferred from the NHS on 1 April 2013.  She added that the decision had been predicated on a number of agreed principles regarding the establishment of local public health presence in both Harrow and Barnet Councils and included the protection of local relationships with the Clinical Commissioning Groups, Commissioning Support Units and Public Health provider organisations.  It also included the principle that each borough had equal access to the Director of Public Health and public health functions in both boroughs.

The Portfolio Holder explained that the Target Operating Model had been developed by the NHS and agreed with the Councils in accordance with national guidance.  She added that the Shared Public Health Team’s responsibilities would include leading on health improvement and reducing inequalities, health protection, and public health support to health service commissioning and provide knowledge and intelligence.

The Portfolio Holder added that the NHS had completed an Equality Impact Assessment for the Target operating Model and a further one would be undertaken.  The interface between the two Councils and Directorates would help capture and utilise synergies, and an inter authority agreement was being developed.  She added that the matter would be reported back to Cabinet in December 2012 or January 2013.

The Corporate Director of Community, Health and Wellbeing outlined the challenges that had been worked through, such as maximising capacity and resources and develop a centre of excellence.  He added that the proposals would result in a reduction of 15% back office costs and drew attention to the proposed structure.  He thanked the Portfolio Holder for her leadership in the management of the proposal, including Councillor Hart from Barnet Council, Andrew Howe, Director of Public Health, officers from across both Councils, Trina Thompson, Senior Policy Officer, and Carol Yarde, Head of Transformation Community Health and Well Being,for their energy and skills in bringing this project to fruition.

The Leader of the Council agreed with the sentiments of the Portfolio Holder and the Corporate Director.  The Leader was of the view that the funding received by both Barnet and Harrow Councils was poor.  He added that the government had allocated funding on historical basis rather than on a needs basis.

In summing up, the Leader of the Council thanked everyone for their work in bringing this complex project to fruition, which was a good deal for the people of Harrow.  He thanked the Portfolio Holder for her skills in bringing this innovative project to a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 516.

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

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To have an overview of Harrow Adult Social Care performance during 2011/ 2012.

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 decisions which have been noted].

The Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing introduced the report, which set out the main elements of the Harrow Local Account 2011/12.  The Portfolio Holder added that the report provided residents with information on the performance of local social care services including details of priorities and outcomes.  She added that the Council would support and work with residents to develop the Local Account which would also contribute to the Service Plan.

The Corporate Director of Community, Health and Wellbeing informed Cabinet that quality assurance had developed over a number of years and there was an element of independence attached to it which ensured that the authority was not inward looking and complacent. He referred to the contributions from partners, such as Harrow LINk, Harrow Mencap, Harrow Age UK and the Citizens’ Advice Bureau which had all welcomed the Local Account and he thanked them for their participation.

The Corporate Director added that an independent audit safeguarding practice was in place and where lessons had been learnt.  Staff training had been improved and they were looking at more creative ways to enhance local safeguarding services.  He added that a number of strands were attached to each area and that the contribution policy had challenged officers due to the sensitivity attached to its implementation.  He commended the work done by officers in this area which was a sensitive and difficult process to implement but was pleased to report that there had been few complaints.

He added that the Care Quality Commission continued to carry out some inspection in this area.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To have an overview of Harrow Adult Social Care performance during 2011/ 2012.

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 decisions which have been noted].

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

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted and that the Corporate Director of Community, Health and Wellbeing, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Housing, be authorised to ensure that the responses outlined in Appendix 1 are included within the draft Housing Strategy and draft Private Sector Housing Strategy to be reported to Cabinet in December 2012.

Reason for Decision:  To enable the response to be formalised in the draft Private Sector Housing Strategy and accompanying action plan.

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 Community, Health and Wellbeing, in response to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Review of ‘Private Rented Sector Housing in Harrow’.

The Leader of the Council invited Councillor Marilyn Ashton, Chair of the Scrutiny Review Group, to address the meeting.  Councillor Ashton referred to the report of the Scrutiny Review Group, which had been non-partisan and she hoped that the recommendations would be useful to any future administrations.  She was pleased to learn that all the recommendation of the review Group had been accepted and she thanked Members of the Review group for their sterling work in this area.  She thanked Heather Smith, Scrutiny Officer, for her work and support provided to the Review Group

The Chairman of the Review Group added that the report summarised the function and achievements of the Review Group, including how the Council should move forward.  She was pleased with the manner in which a Residents’ Panel had engaged with the Council and she thanked them for their participation.  Councillor Ashton added that there were no easy answers that would ensure that excellent standards were maintained in the private sector rented housing but it was important to ensure that decent standards were maintained.  She was of the view that one way to maintain high standards was through the developers and by applying the Local development Framework and national policies.

The Leader of the Council welcomed the response report to the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review Group.  He added that the Review Group’s report had been clear, practical and the approach taken had been ‘bottom up’.  He commended the Chair of the Review Group in her presentation of the report.

The Portfolio Holder for Housing thanked Members and residents of the Review Group for their original recommendations.  He added that the report of the Scrutiny Review Group was timely, as the Directorate was finalising its housing strategies.  He added that all the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review Group would be taken on board.

The Portfolio Holder added that the Council recognised the importance of the private rented sector in meeting the housing needs in the borough and it was therefore important that standards were improved and poor quality of housing was tackled.  He added that due to limited resources, enforcement action had to be directed at tackling the worst conditions, and the Council looked forward to establishing a good relationship with landlords, developers and private tenants.  The Portfolio Holder referred to the number of innovative and effective schemes that were already in place and assured Members that the Council would continue to build on these.  A priority would also be given to bringing back empty homes back into use or finding housing uses for existing Council assets.

In concluding, the Portfolio Holder thanked the Scrutiny Review Group and officers in the Housing Department for their contributions on this important issue.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted and that the Corporate Director of Community, Health and Wellbeing, in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 518.

Report of the Corporate Director of Place Shaping.

RESOLVED:  That 

(1)                  the amendments to the List of Buildings of Local Historic or Architectural Importance at Appendix 1 to the report, including the proposed removal of No. 75 Gordon Avenue Stanmore and No. 31 Pinner Road, be approved subject to consultation;

(2)                  the draft Locally Listed Buildings Supplementary Planning Document be approved for public consultation.

Reason for Decision:  To ensure that the Local Historic Environment Record was up to date in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.  To progress the preparation of a Supplementary Planning Document relating to Locally Listed Buildings as a guide to owners and occupiers, and to inform the preparation of and decisions relating to planning applications for Locally Listed Buildings.

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 Planning and Regeneration introduced the report, which proposed changes to Harrow’s List of Buildings of Local Historic or Architectural Importance and advised Cabinet of a consultation draft Locally Listed Buildings Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).  He drew attention to the proposed additions, including the removal of two, to the list of locally listed buildings, details of which were set out at appendix 1 to the report.

The Portfolio Holder added that the SPD would be published on the Council’s website, and the owners of those buildings presently listed would be informed of the proposals.

The Leader of the Council welcomed the report and the desire to cherish the borough’s heritage, which was a manifesto pledge.

RESOLVED:  That 

(1)                  the amendments to the List of Buildings of Local Historic or Architectural Importance at Appendix 1 to the report, including the proposed removal of No. 75 Gordon Avenue Stanmore and No. 31 Pinner Road, be approved subject to consultation;

(2)                  the draft Locally Listed Buildings Supplementary Planning Document be approved for public consultation.

Reason for Decision:  To ensure that the Local Historic Environment Record was up to date in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.  To progress the preparation of a Supplementary Planning Document relating to Locally Listed Buildings as a guide to owners and occupiers, and to inform the preparation of and decisions relating to planning applications for Locally Listed Buildings.

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 Place Shaping.

RESOLVED:  That, having considered the proposal to extend the Roxborough Park and Grove Conservation Area to include those areas shown on Appendix 1 to the report, the proposed extension to the Conservation Area be approved for public consultation.

Reason for Decision:  As part of the ongoing programme to review the borough’s conservation areas, an area adjacent to the Roxborough Park and the Grove Conservation Area had been identified and assessed as worthy of Conservation Area status.  The incorporation of this area within the Roxborough Park and the Grove Conservation Area would ensure the extended area was covered by the Council’s adopted Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy (May 2008).

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 Planning and Regeneration introduced the report on the proposal to extend the Roxborough Park and the Grove Conservation Area, and sought approval to publish the proposed extension to the Conservation Area for public consultation.  He added that there was a constant review of the conservation areas with a view to providing additional protection to areas of interest, specifically directed to conversions and repairs.

RESOLVED:  That, having considered the proposal to extend the Roxborough Park and Grove Conservation Area to include those areas shown on Appendix 1 to the report, the proposed extension to the Conservation Area be approved for public consultation.

Reason for Decision:  As part of the ongoing programme to review the borough’s conservation areas, an area adjacent to the Roxborough Park and the Grove Conservation Area had been identified and assessed as worthy of Conservation Area status.  The incorporation of this area within the Roxborough Park and the Grove Conservation Area would ensure the extended area was covered by the Council’s adopted Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Strategy (May 2008).

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 Place Shaping.

RESOLVED:  That the draft revised Statement of Community Involvement, at Appendix A to the report, be approved for public consultation.

Reason for Decision:  To ensure that Harrow has an effective, flexible and up-to-date SCI, pursuant to Section 18 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended).

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 Planning and Regeneration introduced the report, which set out a consultation draft revised Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) to provide an updated, replacement SCI for that which was adopted by the Council in 2006.  The Portfolio Holder added that a number of changes in legislation since 2006 had meant that a further SCI was required which would be consulted on widely.  He added that the updated SCI would assist the Council at various planning stages, including in cases where the Planning Inspector was involved.

RESOLVED:  That the draft revised Statement of Community Involvement, at Appendix A to the report, be approved for public consultation.

Reason for Decision:  To ensure that Harrow has an effective, flexible and up-to-date SCI, pursuant to Section 18 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended).

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 Director of Legal and Governance Services.

RESOLVED:  That having considered the legal implications set out at appendix 8 of the report and having reconsidered the decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 13 September 2012 set out in appendix 4 of the report, in relation to the Public Realm Integrated Services Strategy: Business Case, as a result of the decision of the Call-In Sub-Committee, the original Cabinet decision of 13 September 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.

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  To amend the decision.

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

[Call-in does not apply].

The Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services introduced the report, which set out the decision of the Call-in Sub?Committee held on 1 October following receipt and consideration of Call?in Notices in relation to Cabinet’s decision of 13 September on the Public Realm Integrated Services Model (PRISM): Business Case.

The Portfolio Holder added that he had attended the Call-in Sub-Committee meeting on 1 October.  He apologised that a normal legal implications paragraph had not been included in the report considered by Cabinet in September.  However, legal advice had been included in the Business Case, the report had been signed off on behalf of the Monitoring Officer and the Director of Legal and Governance was present at that Cabinet meeting.

The Portfolio Holder stated that the administration took equality impact assessments seriously and assured that these would be ongoing as the project moved ahead, particularly on how it might impact on residents.

The Corporate Director of Environment and Enterprise referred to the legal advice at appendix 8 to the report and asked Cabinet to confirm the original Cabinet decision.  She assured Members that consultations with Portfolio Holder(s) and Unions would continue and that equality impact assessments would be considered at each stage of the process.

The Leader of the Council welcomed the comments of the Portfolio Holder and the Corporate Director.  He referred to appendix 4 which set out the original decision of Cabinet and it was

RESOLVED:  That having considered the legal implications set out at appendix 8 of the report and having reconsidered the decision of the Cabinet meeting held on 13 September 2012 set out in appendix 4 of the report, in relation to the Public Realm Integrated Services Strategy: Business Case, as a result of the decision of the Call-In Sub-Committee, the original Cabinet decision of 13 September 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.

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  To amend the decision.

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

[Call-in does not apply].

Appendix 7 to the report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services at item 19(a).

[Circulated to key Members and Officers, Group Offices and Members’ Library only]

RESOLVED:  That appendix 8 be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To allow the appendix to be considered in conjunction with the main report at agenda item 19(a).

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  As set out under item 19(a).

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation granted:  As set out under item 19(a).

Cabinet received a confidential appendix setting out the Business Case for the proposal.

RESOLVED:  That appendix 8 be noted.

Reason for Decision:  To allow the appendix to be considered in conjunction with the main report at agenda item 19(a).

Alternative Options considered and rejected:  As set out under item 19(a).

Conflict of Interest relating to the matter declared by Cabinet Member / Dispensation granted:  As set out under item 19(a).