Agenda and minutes

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

There were no declarations of interest.

That the minutes of the meetings held on 7 November 2017 and 23 January 2018 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meetings held on 7 November 2017 and 23 January 2018 (two meetings on that date) be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

To receive any public questions received in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 17 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

Questions will be asked in the order in which they were received.  There will be a time limit of 15 minutes for the asking and answering of public questions.

[The deadline for receipt of public questions is 3.00 pm, 22 February 2018.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk   

No person may submit more than one question].

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions or petitions were received at this meeting.

Scrutiny Challenge Panel on Regeneration Financing - Report back from Cabinet meeting held on 18 January 2018.

RESOLVED:  That the reference report from Cabinet be noted.

Report of the Corporate Director, Community and Director of Finance

(Appendices 1 & 2 contain exempt information)

RESOLVED:  That the financial modelling information and sensitivity analysis, including the information in the exempt appendices to the report, be noted.

Revised Draft Challenge Panel Report

The Chair of the Scrutiny Challenge Panel reported on a meeting of the Panel earlier in the evening and tabled a note of additional recommendations for the Committee’s consideration; these dealt primarily with issues of governance and risk management in the light of the financial modelling information which had been provided and discussed at the Panel meeting.  He wished to thank the Members and officers involved in the review. 

The Committee took some time to read the additional recommendations and the following principal points were then made:

The Chair of the Challenge Panel advised that the additional recommendation in respect of business rates (No. 9 below) was designed to address the possible impact of the differential land values which could potentially result in national extra business rate liability and could affect the Council’s funding from central government. 

The Chair of the Committee expressed support for the recommendation about strengthened governance arrangements (No. 10 below).  He had been disappointed at the cancellation of a recent Major Developments Panel (MDP) meeting and suggested there was a case for a separate Regeneration Panel to focus on regeneration programmes.  The Chair of the Challenge Panel was similarly frustrated by the dilution of the MDP’s role and endorsed the consideration of a new, dedicated regeneration panel.  He argued that the MDP had become a mechanism to receive information about forthcoming planning applications rather than having a substantive strategic role.

The Harrow Youth Parliament representative also suggested that the future governance arrangements should be clarified, including the role of a specific regeneration panel.  The Chair of the Challenge Panel suggested that the current arrangements involved infrequent reports to Cabinet and therefore insufficient transparency and accountability; he proposed that a new panel could involve external stakeholders such as the business and voluntary sector as well as the Harrow Youth Parliament.

A Member suggested that the recommendation learning from the financial crash of 2008 (No. 7 below), should be more specific in addressing how lessons would be learned, eg. by structured monitoring and review mechanisms. The Committee approved her proposal that the recommendation be amended to read as follows: 

“That the Programme should investigate and learn from the 2008 financial crash and specifically what happened to rental prices in Harrow and further consider what a 20% - 30% downwards price correction would do to the For Sale strategy to make sure we better protect the financial viability of the programme”.

The Member was also concerned about strengthening the references to the regeneration programme risks in the  Corporate Risk Register (cf. No. 11 below).  The Chair of the Committee pointed to the role of the Governance, Audit, Risk Management and Standards Committee (GARMS) in this respect.  The Chair of the Challenge Panel agreed that there would be value in assessing risks more clearly by reference to the severity of possible impact and the likelihood of occurrence.  The Committee agreed to amend the recommendation to refer to GARMS. 

The Committee agreed the suggestion by the Chair of the Challenge  ...  view the full minutes text for item 261.

Which cannot otherwise be dealt with.

There was none.