Agenda item

Questioner:

Yvonne Lee, on behalf of Harrow Mencap

Asked of:

Councillor Krishna James, Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing

Question:

“Seemingly the outcome of the day service review is the ghettoization of people with profound and multiple disabilities in day services.  How do you justify this?”

Answer:

Thank you for the question.

I do not agree with your characterisation that it is “ghettoization” of people of Harrow and day services.  On the contrary our vision is to provide opportunities for day activities in the community as well as in specific buildings.

The proposal in the report improves opportunities for people with the highest needs to be supported in the borough, in purpose built, modern buildings, with skilled staff.

In addition, Harrow continues to be at the forefront of personalisation and will provide a range of choices for people to access alternative services with personal budgets if they wish.

The report itself includes in detail the reasons for making the proposed changes.  I am sorry if you do not agree with these reasons and may I add, I do understand where you are coming from.  I have read the report and understand the concerns that you have but as someone who has actually gone and visited the new facilities, I feel this is probably the way for us to go now. 

Supplemental Question:

Can you give evidence of how you have used the feedback of service users, carers, the representatives of organisations to make this decision?

Supplemental Answer:

We have looked at the extensive report, the figures, the number of people that are attending various places and according to that, we have come to the conclusions at present. There is always time for dialogue. You know that extensive consultation was carried out. The evidence is in the report.

Questioner:

DevenPillay, Chief Executive, Harrow Mencap

Asked of:

Councillor Thaya Idaikkadar, Leader of the Council

[Answer provided by Councillor Krishna James, Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing]

Question:

“How is the Council Strategically planning for services to meet the needs of Disabled People to fulfil its priority of protecting the most vulnerable in Harrow?”

Answer:

The Council is planning in a number of ways to meet the needs of local residents.  The paper we are presenting today is one of a number that officers have developed recently that cover key areas of service provision and set out our approach to change and how we plan to meet future demand.

However, the main driver for adult services in Harrow is the personalisation of adult social care.  Harrow continues to pioneer approaches to personalisation, and will be launching My Community ePurse in some weeks.  This will enable people to choose and purchase their services online with support from our staff.  We will be publishing a Market Position Statement shortly, which will set out the way that we will work with local service providers to ensure they are able to meet the needs of local residents.

Supplemental Question:

Over the last two to three years, there have been a number of consultations – fairer charging, freedom passes, discretionary passes, taxicards, blue badges, mental health day services, residential services, day services, taxicards again, meals on wheels, on top of Council Tax and the social fund.

All these changes on average, is every two months and has impacted on the same people, time and time again.  How can you justify this as a strategic approach?  To me it appears very piecemeal and I would ask, that having implemented some of these changes and about to implement these changes, are you aware of the impact in human cost on people who are disabled?

Supplemental Answer:

If anybody on this Cabinet understands, I would as I happen to come from the same community and I have a brother who has polio. I do not take things lightly.

I have read the report thoroughly and have talked with my officers.  I have visited the day centres.  I somewhat agree in with you that, it is hard due to the government and different welfare reforms.  I do understand.

Questioner:

Angela Dias, Harrow Association of Disabled People

Asked of:

Councillor Krishna James, Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing

[Answer provided by Councillor Thaya Idaikkadar, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Business Transformation and Communications, Finance, Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services, Property and Major Contracts]

Question:

“Many people in Harrow are reliant on taxicards for achieving access to the local community, and the people who are most reliant on taxicards, are often the most vulnerable people with the most complex needs.  Can you please explain how making any kind of reduction to the scheme, which will for some people mean serious social exclusion, is meeting the Council’s stated priority of ‘supporting and protecting people who are most in need?”

Answer:

Just under 3,000 residents or approximately 1.3% of Harrow’s population is reliant on the London wide Taxi Card Scheme.  Harrow fully supports the continuation of the Scheme and will always lobby TfL to ensure that they continue to fund part of the London wide scheme.

Unfortunately, due to budgetary pressures, it is no longer possible for Harrow to continue to top up the grant allocated for this purpose and this has resulted in the proposed changes to reduce trips to ensure that the scheme is self funding via the TfL grant and therefore viable long term.

I note the comments regarding social exclusion and protecting the vulnerable and would add that there has been a full twelve week consultation on the subject with all scheme members.  Having been sent details of options, in order to achieve the savings required, users have opted for the reduction in trips and a full impact assessment has been carried out to consider the impact to our residents.  In view of this, we intend to work closely with Adult Services, contacts and the wider community to help mitigate identified impacts.  In fact, we have a scheme better than most in London.  These changes are going to bring the level of service very similar to other Councils. 

As you may know, the Chief Executive is leading on this area for the West London Alliance which looks to create jobs and improve skills and businesses.  That sort of concept can be applied in our working with the NHS.  Now part of the reason this has arisen is that the NHS has not been providing the service the residents need.  When residents need to go to the hospital, the transport should be provided by the NHS but they are not doing that properly so we are doing that.  So, this is where I think there is room for improvement and we will keep it under review and look at the situation over time.

We also need to balance the budget. 

By improving the service we can help more.  You are aware that there have been a lot of complaints about the taxi service.  Somebody called a taxi at 11 o’clock, it turned up at 12 o’clock and charged double, including in some instances the metres were run for the full day. We have therefore asked for a meeting with London Councils and I have specifically asked the officers to include you in the meeting.  So by working proactively, I hope we can reduce the problems. Additionally, there are unprecedented cuts from the government and we all have to share the pain. 

I will just finish it by saying you are still going to get 40 trips a year.

Supplemental Question:

Again, I would like to know what evidence you have actually got from the information and feedback given to you by service users, carers and organisations which helped you to make this decision to cut the Taxi Card?

Cllr Idaikkadar:

The consultation led to three options.  One option was to increase the basic you pay from £2.50 to £5.00 but this was rejected by a majority. They thought that the best thing was to reduce the number of trips and we agreed with that.

Questioner:

Adam Gabsi, representing Harrow Association of Disabled people

Asked of:

Councillor Krishna James, Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing

Question:

“The stated aims of the Council for clients of Adult Social Care services, are around personalisation and choice, so can you please explain how planning changes such as closing Bentley and other day centres is offering choice to people, who have made it very clear that their choice is to continue attending Bentley?”

Answer:

Thank you for your question.

The personalisation agenda is about providing choice and control to every local adult who receives social care services. Providing choice in this way inevitably means that some people no longer choose to use Council run services.

Many people have chosen not to attend Bentley Day Centre and the numbers attending are now low.  This is one of the key reasons for the service closing.

However, each of the current users of the service will have a choice of alternatives and will have the choice to move within friendship groups so that they do not lose out.

The Council must make difficult decisions in order to manage within the resources available.  We do not have a choice.

Supplemental Question:

Can you please tell us what evidence you have and how you have used the information and feedback given to you by service users, carers and representatives’ organisations to make this decision?

Supplemental Answer:

Pages 147 -160, set out how the table is worked out and attendance at each Centre. 

Questioner:

Norman Stevenson

Asked of:

Councillor Asad Omar, Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety

Question:

Park Grass-Cutting and Maintenance

I am typical of a number of residents in Pinner South who have expressed concern that Pinner Village Gardens and The Croft parks will no longer have regular grass cutting done.  This will mean that these popular and regularly used parks will become wastelands – this is likely to encourage damage to the environment caused by non-indigenous plant-growth, fly-tipping and possibly even encampments such as has been seen in a neglected site in neighbouring Barnet.  Do you really want to risk ruining Harrow’s famous green environment and making the borough less safe?

Answer:

Thank you for your question.

I am sorry but do not agree with you.  We are not ruining Harrow’s green environment.

What we have done is to reduce the specification in secondary parks to manage our parks and converting parkland to wild grassland with a relaxed mowing regime.  We will continue to monitor the parks and deal with any fly-tipping and illegal encampment robustly.

Path borders, sports pitches and play areas will still be cut at the same three week frequency as they are done now so there will not be any change there and will not prevent people enjoying the park amenities.

Wildflower meadows can sometimes be viewed unfavourably, possibly due to their physical height, inability to see the ground surface and perceived untidiness.

The mowing regime aims to create a wildflower meadow within a suburban environment which can bring a piece of peaceful and restful countryside.

Supplemental Question:

Now the Council is aware of a 1986 archaeological report relating to Pinner Village Gardens.  In there, there are medieval farm earth works, ridge and furrow which are believed to date from the 13^th century.  Since they are the closest remaining to central London, those who know about these regard them as very rare and they should be given Ancient Monument Status.

Your policy of allowing the park to become overgrown, I take the point about meadows but for that particular area to become overgrown shows a wanton disregard for the ancient heritage of Harrow, going back centuries and I have notified English Heritage of this. Will you please immediately reverse the decision?

Supplemental Answer:

This is the decision that was taken by the Cabinet back in February and, as you know, we have classified all our parks into key parks, parkland and open spaces. Pinner Village Gardens is one of the open spaces.  We have reduced some of the pruning and leaf clearance but they will be looked after as well.