Agenda and minutes

Your Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy, which presented the applications for funding and grants-based service level agreements for 2006/07.

Resolved to RECOMMEND:  (To Cabinet)

That Cabinet (1) agree the ‘in principle’ decisions on grant funding and grants-based service level agreements, as set out in Appendix 1 to the minutes, subject to the Council approving its overall Revenue Budget for 2006/07;

(2)  note that the overall grants budget for 2006/07, subject to the Council approving its overall Revenue Budget for 2006/07, is £1,163,694, and agree that the amount of £24,094 accounts for inflation additions to salary;

(3)  agree that £3,500 from the 2005/06 grants budget be used to fund four new applicants, as detailed in Appendix 1 to the minutes;

(4)  agree to approve in 2006/07 a Heritage Grant of £15,000 to the Harrow Heritage Trust out of the Council’s Capital Programme.

[REASON:  To enable the allocation of funding to voluntary organisations in 2006/07.]

See also Minute 221.

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)             the meeting notes at the start of the meeting at the item ‘Reserves’ that the Reserve Member is or will be attending as a reserve;

(iv)              if a Reserve Member whose intention to attend has been noted arrives after the commencement of the meeting, then that Reserve Member can only act as a Member from the start of the next item of business on the agenda after his/her arrival.

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Members:-

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

RESOLVED:  To note the declarations of interest declared by Members in relation to the business to be transacted at this meeting, as set out in Appendix 2 to these minutes.

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 all items be considered with the press and public present with the exception of the following item for the reasons set out below:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 September 2005, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 September 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].

(1)                 Prior notice had been received from the Harrow Association for the Blind of the wish to make a deputation to the Panel in relation to their grant application. The Chair put this request to the meeting and it was agreed at the discretion of the Panel to hear the deputation.

(2)                 Prior notice had been received from the Harrow Refugee Forum of the wish to make a deputation to the Panel in relation to their grant application. The Panel did not agree to hear the deputation, as it did not comply with the procedural requirement to submit a deputation two clear working days before the meeting and contain 10 signatures.

(3)                 Additionally, the Panel considered written representations submitted prior to the meeting from the following organisations:

·         Sangat Centre

·         Ansar Youth Project

·         Harrow Mencap

·         Ignite Trust

·         Ashiana

·         Harrow Refugee Forum

·         Harrow Association for the Blind

·         Kids Can Achieve

·         Harrow Pre-School Learning Alliance

RESOLVED:  That the deputation and representations be received and noted, in the context of the consideration of grant funding for 2006/07.

[Note:  The Panel’s policy in principle is not to receive deputations relating to individual grant applications (Minute 60 of the meeting held on 28 July 2003 refers)].

Report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy.

The Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy which advised the Panel of the Cabinet’s recommendation that an independent adviser selected by representatives of the voluntary sector be appointed to the Panel. The Panel was informed that the election of the adviser had been coordinated by Harrow Association of Voluntary Services (HAVS).

The report outlined the rights and responsibilities of the adviser. It was proposed that the report be amended, in that:

·                     Paragraph 2.3.3, which stated: “the adviser should be allowed to speak whenever the Chair considers it appropriate”, be removed;

·                     A new paragraph be added to the rights and responsibilities of the adviser, stating: “the adviser would have the opportunity to consult officers during the entire course of the assessment of the applications”.

It was agreed by the general assent of the Panel that paragraph 2.3.3 be removed, and that the additional paragraph not be accepted. It was noted that the rights and responsibilities of the adviser should enable him to have the same speaking rights as Members in the meeting, and a distinction was drawn between the role of Member and adviser.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the Cabinet’s recommendation for an independent adviser nominated from within the voluntary sector to be appointed to the Panel at the start of its meeting on 5 December 2005 and to all subsequent meetings of the Panel be confirmed;

(2)  no reserve adviser be appointed at this time;

(3)  the rights and responsibilities of the adviser, as outlined in the report, be accepted, with the following amendment:

Section 2.3.3: “the adviser should be allowed to speak whenever the Chair considers it appropriate”, be removed.

Report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy

The Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy which presented the applications for funding that had been made to the Edward Harvist Trust in the second round of applications.

The Chair proposed that as 15 out of the 19 applicants had also applied for grants in 2006/07, these applications should be deferred until the January meeting of the Panel, pending outcome of the grant applications. In subsequent discussion, Members agreed that all 19 applications should be deferred to the January meeting of the Panel.

Members discussed the criteria for administering the Edward Harvist Trust funding. A Member of the Panel referred specifically to the criteria that the Trust funds were meant to support primarily small, unfunded organisations and new and emerging groups. The Panel adviser emphasised that the Panel needed to be clear on the parameters and principles that underpinned the process for administering the funds.

A Member clarified that the proposal had intended that both the Edward Harvist Trust applications and the grant applications be deferred until January 2006. Upon being put to the vote it was carried with the casting vote of the Chair that the grant applications of any applicant who had also applied to the Edward Harvist Trust be deferred until January 2006.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the 19 applications to the Edward Harvist Trust be deferred until the January 2006 meeting of the Panel;

(2) the grant applications of applicants who applied for funding from the Edward Harvist Trust in the second round of applications be deferred until the January 2006 meeting of the Panel.

Report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy

Further to Recommendation 1 above, officers informed the Panel that several applications had been received after the deadline for receipt of completed forms, which was 30 September 2005. Members discussed the implications of accepting or rejecting the late applications. Whilst some Members argued that it was important to be consistent and apply the same deadline to all applications, others, whilst agreeing with this principle, emphasised that the funding for some of these organisations would need to come from another budget within the Authority. It was suggested that the late application be accepted this year, and that the deadline be enforced more stringently in future years. Upon being put to the vote, this was not carried. Accordingly, late applications from the following organisations were not considered:

Bentley Priory Nature Reserve; Harrow Crime Prevention Panel; Harrow Pre-School Learning Alliance; Harrow Weald Common Conservators; Harrow Women’s Centre; Women’s Aid Harrow; and Harrow Agenda 21 Environmental Forum.

RESOLVED:  That the applications received after the deadline of 30 September 2005 not be accepted.

[Councillors Marilyn Ashton, Billson, Mrs Joyce Nickolay and Anjana Patel asked to be recorded as having voted for the motion].

Report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy

The Panel received a report of the Director of Financial and Business Strategy, which informed Members that the standard SLA template had been revised to take account of recent legislative changes.

The Panel noted that comments from the voluntary sector advisor had been incorporated into the report.

RESOLVED:  That the changes be noted.

Verbal update on the Member-led Review of Community Premises

The Panel received a verbal update on the progress of the Member-led review of the community premises. The meeting was advised that in February 2005, the Panel had agreed to a Member-led review of the community premises, and that in June 2005 an officer had been appointed to support the process.

A Member of the Panel presented the following motion to the Panel:

(i)         “The officer appointed to the Community Premises Review Group be asked to complete interviews with Community Premises user groups on her own in the first instance.”

Further to this, an amendment to the motion was presented:

(ii)         “The officer appointed to the Member-led Community Premises Review Group should support Members in carrying out the said review; that she communicate dates of the interviews in reasonable time so that Members can attend, diaries permitting. She may however carry out the interviews regardless of whether any Councillors are able to attend, so long as they have received reasonable notice.”

The Member who had presented the motion stated that if Members were to attend the interviews, it was her view that all political parties should be represented. In acknowledging the difficulty of organising this and progressing the review, she proposed that the officer leading the review should attend the interviews on her own in the first instance. She cited concerns expressed by some of the community premises users on the impacts of Member attendance at the meetings.

The Member who had presented the amendment to the motion suggested that other users had asked for Members to be present at the interviews, and emphasised that the review should be led by elected Members. It was suggested that the review should follow the scrutiny model of cross-party working. Further to this a second motion was proposed:

(iii)        “In the interests of efficiency and using Scrutiny as a model, the Grants Advisory Panel appoint a chairperson for the Review.”

Upon being put to the vote:

·                     the amendment to the first motion set out at (ii) above was carried with the casting vote of the Chair;

·                     the second motion set out at (iii) above was carried with the casting vote of the Chair and Councillor Omar was appointed Chairperson of the review group.

It was further agreed that Councillor Mrs Joyce Nickolay be appointed Vice-Chair of the review group.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the amended motion as set out at (ii) above be adopted;

(2)  that the motion set out at (iii) above be adopted, and that Councillor Omar be appointed Chair of the member-led review of community premises;

(3)  that Councillor Mrs Joyce Nickolay be appointed Vice-Chair of the review.

Further to Advisory Panel and Consultative Forum Procedure Rule 12.1 (Part 4E of the Constitution) requiring the termination of the meeting at 10.00 pm, and during the course of the debates then in progress, the Chair proposed at 10.00 pm that it be agreed to extend the ‘guillotine’ until 10.30 pm (subsequently, the Panel approved further extensions until 11.00 pm).

RESOLVED:  That the Panel’s meeting be continued beyond the procedural closure time to enable the items on the agenda to be completed.