Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed the Portfolio Holder for Property and Major Contracts, the Corporate Director of Place Shaping and the Head of Legal Practice to the meeting.  He advised that the Leader of the Council and Interim Director of Finance would be in attendance during the meeting for the item referred by Council on 7 July 2011 and had submitted apologies for lateness due to another meeting.

The Chair indicated that the agenda would be re-arranged to take the agenda items in the following order – 1-6, 9, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 10/14.

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.

A Member expressed concern at the attendance levels of the co?opted Members of the Committee and questioned at what stage their membership would be reviewed due this.  Officers undertook to look into this.

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:

(a)               all Members of the Committee, Sub Committee, Panel or Forum;

(b)               all other Members present in any part of the room or chamber.

RESOLVED:  To note that the following interests were declared:

Agenda Item 7 – Reference from Council – Petition submitted to Council on 7 July 2011 – Department of Health Funding

Councillor Graham Henson, who was not a member of the Committee, declared a personal interest in that he was the Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Councillor Paul Osborn declared a personal interest in that he had previously been the Portfolio Holder for Performance.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane declared a personal interest in that he had previously been the Portfolio Holder for Adults and Housing.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

Agenda Item 10 and 14 – Implications of the Harrow Association of Voluntary Service (HAVS) Investigation – Challenge Panel Report

Councillor Brian Gate, who was not a member of the Committee, declared a personal interest during the course of the meeting in that he was a trustee of HAVS.  He would remain in the room whilst the matter was considered and voted upon.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2011 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2011, be taken as read and signed as a correct record, subject to the first bullet point on page 8 of the second supplemental agenda being amended to reflect the point that bringing together multiple single pathways would inevitably identify gaps in provision.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents/organisations under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 17 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were put, or petitions or deputations received at this meeting under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rules 17, 15 and 16 (Part 4B of the Constitution) respectively.

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services

The Committee received a report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services which provided a summary of recent case law which explained the legislation in relation to the public sector and equality duty.  An officer outlined the content of her report and advised that there had recently been a number of cases on equalities issues and that the public sector equality duty had come into effect on 5 April 2011.

The officer reported that the Council must have due regard to the public sector equality duty and that it should not merely be a tick box exercise.  It was necessary for Members to apply their minds to the equality duty as it was they, not officers, who must have due regard.  Referring to the Rahman case, she emphasised that report writers must have access to all relevant information and must consider the degree of disadvantage that might be caused.  The officer advised that the Courts would not interfere with the decision makers weighing up of countervailing factors unless they viewed a decision as being completely irrational.

In considering the report and officer presentation, Members made a number of comments and asked questions which were duly responded to.  These included:

·                    Referring to the concept of non-delegable duty, a Member stated that he had expressed concern at the lack of Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) for Section 256 money.  The officer advised that the decision maker must understand the impact and have due regard to the equalities duty and that this had been done in relation to the budget.

·                    In response to a Member’s question, the officer advised that the equality duty applied to all Council functions and reiterated that Members must have due regard.

·                    A report submitted to Planning Committee on Lee Valley Park had not referred to an EIA and a Member questioned whether equalities were being properly considered in planning decisions.  He added that Haringey Council had had a planning decision quashed having not given consideration to the impact on the community.  The officer advised that it was a question of weighing up the factors in the case.  Disability issues had been a material consideration for a long time but that she would like to give that issue some further thought.  EIAs were considered during the preparation of the Local Development Framework.

·                    Responding to a question on North Harrow Assembly Hall and the associated community relations issue, the officer advised that if equality was not mentioned in a report there would have to be other evidence that it was considered by the decision maker.

·                    Referring to paragraph 8.3.2 in the appendix to the report, a Member questioned whether Members were embracing this issue and having due regard.  The officer advised that there was no legislation stating that it was a statutory duty to do an EIA but many authorities were.  The decision maker should also take into account other information such as issues being raised in the press.  The Council had a Corporate Equalities Group and leads within each  ...  view the full minutes text for item 168.

Petition submitted to Council on 7 July 2011 – Department of Health Funding

The Chair welcomed the Leader of the Council, the Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services, the Interim Director of Finance and the lead petitioner to the meeting.  He reminded Members that the transfer of £2.1m funding to the transformation budget had been debated and voted upon at Council on 7 July but as the petition contained in excess of 1,000 signatures, in accordance with the Petition Scheme, it was referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for consideration.  He emphasised that debate could not be re?opened on this issue but that perhaps lessons could be learned from the Committee’s debate.

The Chair outlined the procedure for the meeting.  The Committee agreed that the petition was valid but some Members did not agree to the proposed time limit of 30 minutes for debate.  These Members indicated that whilst they accepted that the Council had made a decision they wished to have the questions submitted by the public answered.

The Interim Director of Finance gave a detailed explanation of the background to the transfer of the Primary Care Trust (PCT) funding and suggested that there had been some misunderstanding which she hoped would be clarified by her presentation.  The content of her presentation is included at Appendix I to these minutes. During the course of her presentation, the Interim Director of Finance advised the following:

·                    The Government had set a 28-30% reduction in funding for local government over a 4 year period.  This was against a backdrop of changing demography and inflationary pressures.

·                    The reductions in budget were front loaded and therefore would be most significant in the first two years of the four year period.

·                    To deliver the same services and operate in the same way as before, the Council would have had a shortfall of £19 million in 2011/12.  The Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) meant that the Council would need to find approximately £60 million per annum of savings by the 4^th year of the CSR period, which meant that there was a need for major change. 

·                    The Government had directed PCTs to transfer money to Councils under Section 256 Agreements to help cover the costs of “existing social care provision”. For Harrow, this amounted to £2.6 million for 2011/12.

·                    The Council had not included this money in the 2011/12 budget due to concerns over the financial situation of the PCT, but it funded the costs of existing social care provision by using Council monies. This use of the Council’s base budget was preferable to relying on time-limited funding.

·                    The 2011/12 budget for adult social care included no cuts to front line services, although there were savings covered by a consultation that were fully covered by a contingency budget in the event they were not agreed. The budget did include an extra £1.5 million for demography pressures and a substantial share of a £1 million contingency.

·                    The Primary Care Trust (PCT) had transferred funds to Harrow as directed by Government.  There was no bidding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 169.

Report of the Corporate Director of Place Shaping

The Corporate Director of Place Shaping introduced the report which provided an overview of the Transformation Programme – Development of Council Property Assets Project.  He advised that the current progress would be reported to the Major Developments Panel on 27 July 2011 and that it was planned to submit a report to Cabinet in the Autumn.

The Corporate Director outlined the content of his report stating that a key issue was that the requirements of the Area Action Plan (AAP) would apply equally as a land owner.  The Council’s four strategic sites (Civic Centre site, Byron Park, Greenhill Way car park and Gayton Road Site) represented 30% of the Area Action Plan.  In terms of the commercial master planning work relating to these four sites, it was intended to report to Cabinet in early 2012.  The market appeared to be easing and planning applications from Dandara, Land Securities and Wichford were expected.  Drawing attention to the objectives of the Transformation Programme, he emphasised that officers wished to ensure that a significant revenue benefit was delivered.

The Corporate Director reported that following the approval by Cabinet of the disposals programme in May, the first property had been sold at auction the previous week for just above the expected price.  There was now a forty day completion period for the sale.

Members made a number of comments and asked questions which were duly responded to as follows:

·                     A Member questioned how many facilities outside the Civic 1 site would be eliminated and how Members would know when this process had been completed.  The Corporate Director responded that only stand alone office buildings, other than the Depot and Teachers’ Centre, were being consolidated but that he would advise the Member separately in terms of numbers.  High level planning assumptions had been used and the master plan would enable officers to bring forward plans for the best approach.  The Corporate Director added that, in terms of capital, £2.5m was available in the budget over the next three years to complete the necessary work to the civic site, including fire escapes and IT moves.

·                     In response to a Member’s question as to whether the third sector would be able to make use of some buildings, the Portfolio Holder advised that it was not yet know which option would be chosen.  The Corporate Director advised that the Civic site as a whole underperformed in commercial terms.  The overall infrastructure was being considered in terms of supporting the existing and growing community.

·                     A Member expressed some concern that alternative locations for the Civic Site would be removed by demolishing some buildings.  The Corporate Director reassured the Committee that the Council would not end up in a ‘beached’ position.

·                     In terms of deliverability on Civic 1, the Corporate Director advised staff would be given smaller desks and less space around their desks.  There was to be a move away from the concept of ‘my desk’.  There was capacity for this when you took into account annual  ...  view the full minutes text for item 170.

Report of the Divisional Director of Partnership Development and Performance

Members received the draft scope for the Snow Clearance Challenge Panel and noted that the scoping meeting had been held on 11 July 2011.

A Member advised that the London Borough of Sutton were providing residents with free grit and that it might worth contacting them about the scheme.

RESOLVED:  That the scope for the Snow Clearance Challenge Panel be agreed.

Report of the Divisional Director of Partnership Development and Performance

Members received the draft scope for the Debt Recovery Process Challenge Panel and noted that the scoping meeting was held on 5 July 2011.

The Chair of the Challenge Panel advised that the Panel were going to specifically examine test cases and requested that any appropriate cases be notified to the Panel.

RESOLVED:  That the scope for the Debt Recovery Process Challenge Panel be agreed.

Report of the Divisional Director of Partnership Development and Performance

The Committee received the report from the Harrow Association of Voluntary Service (HAVS) challenge panel which considered the implications of the HAVS investigation.  Members noted that a Part II appendix containing the Audit report appeared elsewhere on the agenda.

The Chair of the Challenge Panel expressed thanks to the scrutiny officers for their valued work and also colleagues who had taken part in the review.  She stated that the review was a good example of cross party working but that the review had been incorrectly titled as it was forward looking.  Referring to the panel’s recommendations, she drew particular attention to numbers 17 and 20.  She was pleased to report that the recommendation that appeals should be held before any grants were finalised had been taken on board.  In terms of recommendation 20, she emphasised the importance of this moving forward, particularly in light of the discussion earlier in the meeting relating to Adult Social Care and the PCT funding.

A Member echoed the sentiments expressed and also thanked the Chair of the Panel and the Internal Audit Team.  He stated that the review was a good example of scrutiny and audit working together but that he was mindful of the CIPFA guidance that there needed to be separation.  He added that he was slightly disappointed that the internal audit report could not be released but that he was respectful of the position taken on this.

RESOLVED:  That the report from the HAVS Challenge Panel be agreed and referred to Cabinet in September for consideration.

In accordance with the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4B of the Constitution) it was

RESOLVED:  At

(1)               9.55 pm to continue until 10.15 pm;

(2)               10.12 pm to continue until 10.30 pm.