Agenda and minutes

The Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy which provided an update on those grants for 2004/05 which had been reserved by the Panel, pending further information.

The meeting was advised of some corrections to figures contained in the report, specifically, that a grant of £1,500, not £3,000, had been reserved for the ADHD Support Group, and that a grant of £7,000, not £4,500, had been reserved for the Ignite Trust; the total amount of grants reserved for 2004/05 was therefore £14,500, not £13,500.

Officers informed the Panel that the reserved grants could not be released and recommended that they be withdrawn and taken back into the grants budget. It was also noted that £3,000 from the unallocated funds for 2004/05 had already been granted to Harrow Council for Racial Equality at the Panel’s meeting on 24 January 2005. 

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (To Cabinet)

(1)  That the reserved grants in 2004/05 amounting to £12,000 which cannot be released, be withdrawn and taken back into the grant aid budget, together with £1,223 which was unallocated in 2004/05;

(2)  that the provision of £13,223 be carried forward into 2005/06 in accordance with Financial Regulations.

REASON:  To report the underspend as part of revenue budget monitoring and seek a carry forward of provision in accordance with Financial Regulations. 

(See also Minute 171).

The Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy which provided the additional information requested by the Panel on grant applications for 2005/06 that had been deferred from the previous Panel meeting on 24 January 2005. The report also provided an update on those organisations for which the Panel had reserved funding on 24 January 2005, pending further information.

The meeting was informed of some corrections to figures contained in the report, specifically, that £10,223, not £11,723, of unallocated funds was available from 2004/05, and that £17,685, not £19,185 was remaining from the grants budget for 2005/06 if Members agreed to carry this unallocated fund forward.  This would increase to £20,405, not £21,905, if the Panel agreed the revised recommendation for the Asian Elderly Group.   

Members discussed the deferred applications and reserved grants, and additionally considered items relating to Harrow Bereavement Care and the Sangat Advice Centre, as follows.

DEFERRED APPLICATIONS

Harrow Council for Racial Equality:  Officers informed the Panel that they had not yet received the requested letter of support from Harrow Police for the organisation’s additional funding request. Members suggested that since the group had not provided the information requested they should not receive any grant. Another Member suggested that although it was unrealistic to award the full £14,000 requested, a smaller grant of £4,000 should be provided to support the organisation’s work.

Members discussed the role of the monitoring service that the additional funding was requested for. The Panel was advised that they needed to decide whether the monitoring service should be considered as part of the group’s responsibilities or as additional work, and to consider whether the group currently had enough resources to support the service. Members agreed that a more comprehensive report was required, specifically covering why the monitoring service was needed and how the victims of racial incidents identified by the monitoring were supported. It was suggested that a grant of £4,000 should be reserved pending this information. A Member expressed concern about the usefulness of the monitoring work, and suggested that no grant be provided. Upon being put to a vote this was not carried.

It was subsequently agreed by general assent to reserve £4,000, pending further information.

Middlesex Association for the Blind:  The Panel agreed that the group no longer required funding.

National Council of Vanik Associations UK:  The Panel agreed to recommend a grant of £1,000 to contribute to general running costs. Officers believed that extra funding could be provided through Social Services once a clear need for the organisation’s work in Harrow was established.

BTWSC:  The Panel agreed to recommend a grant of £1,500.

Community Link Up:  The Panel agreed to recommend a grant of £3,000.

Harrow Bangladeshi Association:  The Panel discussed this application in conjunction with the reserved grant for the Harrow Bengalee Association. The Panel received a deputation from a representative of the Harrow Bengalee Association (see also Minute 169).

Members discussed the benefits of the associations merging under an umbrella group. A Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item

The Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy which presented applications for accommodation at the community premises.

A Member tabled an alternative proposal for the allocation of community premises, which focused on enforcing the maximum length of stay criteria of three years and dealing with the demand for space in the community premises. It was suggested that the proposal would encourage the more established groups to move from the community premises, making them available for emerging groups. It was also suggested that a Member-led review of the criteria for assigning community premises was needed.

A Member expressed disappointment that the proposal had not been provided to all Members of the Panel earlier, for their consideration, but it was stated that the proposal had only just been completed. The Panel also noted the concern of the relevant professional officers and their advice regarding a potential conflict between the proposal and the current existing criteria. Following some discussion, it was agreed that the allocation of community premises should be deferred to the next meeting of the Grants Advisory Panel, following a proposed Member-led review of the criteria for community lettings. The membership and Terms of Reference of the proposed review group were also discussed and agreed.  

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (To Portfolio Holder)

(1)  That the Grants Advisory Panel’s request to establish a Member-led review group be approved;

(2)  that the review group’s Terms of Reference and membership be approved, as set out in Appendix 2;

(3)  that an extension be granted to all organisations currently occupying the community premises, in anticipation that the report of the review group would be received at the next meeting of the Grants Advisory Panel on 7 June 2005.

REASON:  To enable Members to review the criteria for allocating community premises before new allocations are decided. To ensure that the community premises remain occupied until the Panel receives the report of the review group.

The Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy which outlined applications received from charities wishing to be sponsored for a street collection permit in 2005. Members also considered a supplemental report, which set out a further late application.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (To the Portfolio Holder)

(1)  That the applications received from Michael Sobell House, Hillingdon North Mencap, Harrow Multiple Sclerosis Therapy Centre and the Paul Strickland Scanner Centre for street collection permits for 2005 be sponsored;

(2)  that the request from Barts and London Students’ Association to hold a collection in Harrow on 11 April 2005, which falls within their London “Rag Week”, be sponsored.

REASON:  To enable the organisations to make a formal application to the Metropolitan Police in order to obtain a permit to collect on a specified date.

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

Reserve Members may attend meetings:-

(i)                 to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)               where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)             after notifying the Chair at the start of the meeting.

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no Reserve Members in attendance at this meeting.

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from all Members present.

RESOLVED: To note that the following interests were declared:

(1)  The following Members declared personal interests in the business transacted at the meeting arising from their involvement with the organisations listed. Accordingly, they remained and took part in the discussion and voting on the relevant items.

(2)  The following Member declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the business transacted at the meeting arising from their involvement with the organisation listed. Accordingly, they left the room and took no part in the discussion or voting on the applications relating to this organisation:

To consider whether any of the items listed on the agenda should be considered with the press and public excluded on the grounds that it is thought likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that there would be disclosure of confidential information in breach of an obligation of confidence or of exempt information as defined in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.

RESOLVED:  That (1) in accordance with the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the following agenda item be admitted late to the agenda by virtue of the special circumstances and grounds for urgency detailed below:-

(2) all items be considered with the press and public present.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 January 2005, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 January 2005, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents or organisations under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were received at this meeting under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 13 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no petitions were received at this meeting under the provisions of the Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 13 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4E of the Constitution).

[Note:  The Panel’s policy (Minute 60:  28.07.03) in principle is not to receive deputations relating to individual grant applications].

The Chair presented a memorandum to the Panel outlining the requirements for a Panel meeting to receive deputations. Members noted that in July 2003, the Grants Panel had agreed to reinstate its previous policy for deputations not to be received by the Panel relating to individual grant applications.

The Chair advised the Panel that his decision to allow deputations and representations at the meeting of the Grants Advisory Panel on 24 January 2005 was influenced by guidance from officers who indicated that the Panel received deputations in accordance with Procedure Rule 14 for Advisory Panels.

Members agreed that the deputations and representations received at the previous meeting were useful, and it was suggested that applicants should be allowed to speak only for issues of clarification at the request of Members of the Panel. Members commented that allowing individual organisations to make deputations on their Grant applications may be perceived as giving an unfair advantage to these organisations.

A Member suggested that guidance notes on deputations should be made available for members of the public at future meetings of the Panel.

The Panel noted that one deputation had been received from the Harrow Bengalee Association, and agreed to hear it in conjunction with the organisation’s application.

RESOLVED:  That the deputation from the Harrow Bengalee Association be received and noted, in the context of the consideration of grant funding for 2005/06.

The attached correspondence has been received by the Chair, who has requested that it be included on the agenda for this meeting.

[Note:  the correspondence may be read in conjunction with items 10 and 11 below. Following the Cabinet meeting on 17 March 2005, all applicants will be contacted with the final decision on their grant application and information on the appeals procedure. Appeals will be heard at the Grants Advisory Panel meeting on 7 June 2005].

The Panel received correspondence which had been provided to the Chair from the Harrow Bengalee Association, Sangat Advice Centre and Sahara Resource Centre relating to the Grants Advisory Panel meeting on 24 January 2005.

RESOLVED:  That the matters arising further to the correspondence now received be determined in the context of deferred applications (see Recommendation 2 above).

Report of the Director (Financial and Business Strategy)

Further to Recommendation 1 above, a Member sought clarification on the conditions for the release of funds from the Edward Harvist Trust.

The Panel was advised that the Trust should not be used to augment the grants budget and that the allocation of funds would be decided at a meeting of the Trustees in June. Members requested that officers report to the Trust in June on three outstanding applications. Officers also agreed to distribute a letter outlining the criteria and basic standards of governance adopted by the Trust. 

RESOLVED:  That the above be noted.

Report of the Director (Financial and Business Strategy)

See Recommendation 2.

Report of the Director (Financial and Business Strategy)

See Recommendation 3.  

Report of the Director (Financial and Business Strategy)

See Recommendation 4.

Report of the Director (Financial and Business Strategy)

The Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy which updated Members on the attempts being made to establish a process for handling Community Lettings applications once the Education Lettings were abolished.

Members were asked to delay the introduction of a new policy on Community Lettings for a further year, so that officers could carry out a comprehensive consultation exercise with schools and voluntary organisations on the process.

RESOLVED:  (1)  To delay the introduction of the policy on Community Lettings until 1 September 2006;

(2)  to extend the current Education Lettings system until 31 August 2006.