Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED: To note the attendance of the following duly constituted Reserve Members:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 September 2018 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 September 2018 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, Thursday 8 November 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 the meeting.

RESOLVED:  To note that none were received.

Report of the Divisional Director of Strategic Commissioning.

The Committee received a report of the Divisional Director, Strategic Commissioning which set out the draft scopes for the Scrutiny Reviews on Preventing Youth Crime and Highways Maintenance.

RESOLVED: That

(1)          the draft scopes for the Scrutiny Reviews on Preventing Youth Crime and Highways Maintenance, be agreed;

(2)          Councillors Peymana Assad and Honey Jamie be members of the Youth Crime Scrutiny Review Group;

(3)          Councillors Richard Almond, Dan Anderson and Jerry Miles be Members of the Highways Maintenance Review Group;

(4)               the timing of each Review and associated reporting arrangements be discussed further and agreed with the relevant Scrutiny officer.

Report of the Corporate Director of Community.

The Committee considered a report of the Corporate Director, Community which set out the key contents of Harrow’s Draft Transport Local Implementation Plan, the consultation process, consultation results and the recommended changes to the plan following consultation.

A Member advised that the LIP reflected the strategic outcomes of the Mayor of London’s Transport Strategy and that the draft proposals had been amended taking into account the consultation results.  The policies in the LIP would enable a move towards improved, safer and more sustainable systems of transport in London.   He added that it was encouraging that TfL’s response to the draft LIP submitted by Harrow had been positive.

Members asked the following questions and officers responded as follows.

Did the Mayor of London’s  target of 80 per cent of all trips to be made on foot, by bicycle or using public transport by 2041 include Harrow and was step-free access planned for all tube stations in Harrow?

The officer advised that the 80 per cent target was a London-wide target.  He added that TfL had a programme for the introduction of step-free access at all tube stations and works had begun at Harrow on the Hill station. Discussions were ongoing with TfL regarding Stanmore and Sudbury Hill stations and officers would continue to lobby TfL regarding the matter.  The officer undertook  to seek confirmation from TfL regarding whether Sudbury Hill Station had been prioritised for step-free access and to share this information to Committee Members.

With regard to the new policy to support the police to address anti-social behaviour around Harrow bus station – were there plans to roll this out to bus stops near schools?

The officer advised that this measure would be focussed on Harrow Bus Station.

A Member asked whether the policy CB3 - the intention to encourage modal shift towards more sustainable forms of transport by developing travel plans and working with businesses to encourage them to switch deliveries from vans to sustainable travel modes - was valuable or would it restrict the Council’s options?

The officer responded that the consultation response from Harrow Cyclists  was extremely useful.  The cycling schemes and measures proposed by the group had been shown to work elsewhere and could work equally well in Harrow.  Members and traffic officers had recently undertaken a visit to Waltham Forest to evaluate the mini-Holland cycling scheme which had been introduced there.

How would the police and schools be supported to address traffic noise and pollution issues and were the proposed 20mph zones enforceable?

The detail of how the LIP policies would be implemented and funded would be worked out once TfL and the Council had approved the draft policy.  Officers would work with existing partners such as schools and the police to develop the best way to deliver the policy. 

How and when would the LIP3 policies be risk assessed and would other agencies such at the police and the local planning authority be consulted?

Did he expect an increase in litigation against the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

Report of the Corporate Director Community.

The Committee considered a report of the Corporate Director Community which provided an overview of the current waste and recycling

performance within Harrow as well as outlining the key local, national and

international challenges surrounding the waste industry and their potential

impact on the Borough.

Members asked the following questions and officers responded as follows.

What was the reason for the reduction in food waste collected from the kerbside since 2017?

An officer advised that the figures were based on quarter 1 comparisons. Since then, figures had  increased slightly.  Harrow had one of the highest tonnages of waste collected in West London. Also, separate food waste collections helped residents to realise the amount of food waste they threw away so there was always an element of waste minimisation. In addition the food waste collection pilot which had been rolled out to flats in the borough had good levels of participation, helping to increase food waste tonnages.

What would be the likely impact of Brexit on the Waste service and the Waste Plan? What impact would Brexit have on migrant workers employed in the recycling industry? What was being done to educate residents regarding recycling? What had been the impact of China’s restrictions on waste imports? The Member stated that she would like to be included in discussions about reducing plastic waste as part of the Recycling and Reuse Plan

The officer stated that the current European recycling target to be achieved by 2020 was 50 per cent and technically under the EU fines could be levied for non-compliance. However, it remained to be seen whether these targets would be enforced post-Brexit and whether they would be changed.  The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs were also about to release their Recycling Strategy which should give further information on what the UK would do. With regard to migrant workers, to date, no impact had been felt locally, however, there was a potential impact nationally. 

The Portfolio Holder for Environment advised that the Council’s recycling officers would be responsible for educating residents about recycling.  They disseminated leaflets to households and provided information to schools.

How much of Harrow’s dry mixed recycling waste was contaminated?

Levels of contamination were generally low. Harrow’s recycling contractors carried out sampling of loads and overall Harrow had consistently low levels of contamination (7-8 per cent), which was lower than most other Local Authorities.

For the food waste pilot in flats, participation was based on actual collected food waste, as the contaminated food bins were collected separately so as not to skew the results.

What was the reason for the variance in the rates of composting, household waste and recycling since 2017?

The officer advised that there had been a national reduction in recycling rates and these were affected by budget cuts. The chargeable garden waste scheme in Harrow had one of the highest participation rates in London.

How would the findings of the surveys and assessments impact in the current financial year?

The officer advised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

Report of the Interim Corporate Director of People.

The Committee receive a report of the Interim Corporate Director, People which set out the statutory Children and Families Services Complaints Annual Report for 2017/18.

Following a brief overview of the report, the presenting officers responded to Members questions as follows.

There were 3,990 children who were considered to be children in need (CiN) throughout 2017/18 and their ethnic breakdown was predominantly BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) with just over a quarter being of white ethnicity.  Why was there no data in the report regarding the ethnic breakdown of complainants?  Why did 27% of complainants ‘disagree with social care opinion’?

An officer advised that this data was captured by a different team.  The data in the report related to the number and nature of complaints received and outcomes.  The officers undertook to provide information regarding the ethnic breakdown of complainants in future reports.  He added that the equalities data included in the report demonstrated that the complainants were of various ethnicities.

The Member pointed out that the term ‘Afghani’ referred to the currency of Afghanistan and that the correct term for someone from Afghanistan was Afghan.  This was noted by the officers.

An officer added that Managers, social care staff and the complaints teams continued to work towards a more balanced, open and less defensive approach to complaints, where concerns were recognised and complainants received appropriate, timely responses. Officers were encouraged to reflect on practices and on the outcomes of each complaint and endeavoured to successfully resolve some complaints before they reached stage 1.

Were complaints made about individual social workers tracked to see if there were any patterns emerging?  How was the complaints process signposted to clients? Were written complaints taken more seriously than verbal ones?

An officer advised that complaints against social workers were monitored and confirmed that no single social worker had received multiple complaints.  If any issues relating to practice or performance were highlighted then these would be dealt with through additional training.  Every looked after child was given a complaints leaflet and their carers and advocates could represent them.  Individuals could complain by phone or in writing and no complaints were turned away, even those that may appear trivial in the first instance. 

Why had there been an increase Stage 1 complaints?

During 2017/18 there was a slight increase in the number of Stage1 complaints received.  As with previous years, the majority of received transactions (both representations and formal complaints) were via Targeted Services (81%).  There had been no stage 3 complaints and one case had been referred to the Ombudsman under the EHCP (Education, Health & Care Package) process.

How were anonymous complaints dealt with?  At what stage would the team involve other partner agencies such as the police in a case? How were stage 2 complaints dealt with?

An officer advised that some anonymous complaints had been received over the years and these would be investigated and the appropriate safeguarding procedures would be followed.  There was a detailed policy regarding this and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Report of the Interim Director of Adult Social Services.

The Committee received a report of the interim Director of Adult Social Services, which set out the statutory Adults Services Complaints Annual report (social care only) 2017/18.

A Member asked how it had been possible to informally resolve two of the stage 2 complaints received? Why was there no data relating to the ‘representations’ included in the reports?

An officer advised that informal meetings were offered to both adults and children complainants between stages 1 & 2 and this meant that complaints were often resolved informally at those meetings. He added that there was no statutory requirement to capture this information in the report, however, he undertook to include this information in future reports.

A Member noted that there were no joint NHS and social care complaints received.  She asked what would be the likely nature of such a complaint. 

The officer cited a previous case of a patient with dementia whose family had made a complaint.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.