Agenda item

Questioner:

RakshaPandya, Mind in Harrow

Asked of:

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Adults and Housing

Question:

We want to ask about the developments at the Bridge Mental Health Day Centre, what is being done by Rethink Mental Illness, the new provider, to address the concerns raised by Mental Health Service Users, such as lack of staffing, particularly for 1:1 support, the sudden loss of personal budget funded groups, the lack publicity for the service particularly for people who lost their service at Marlborough Hill and marginalised groups such as BMER communities?

Answer:

Thank you for your question.

Before I start to answer, I would like to just to affirm that myself and the administration are very much committed to making sure that mental health is not forgotten about and so if there are opportunities to meet and discuss this and to make sure where your concerns are being raised, that we listen and see what we can do to address them.  I am happy to either meet later or set up a meeting via email to actually go through some of these concerns.

I am advised that Rethink Mental Illness took over their contract to The Bridge in June 2013. 

The implementation has been overseen by a Day Care Services Steering Group and that includes representatives from The Bridge, from Harrow User Group, Harrow Rethink Support Group and various others.  We are also trying to make sure that we meet widely with the Council, Harrow NHS and CNWL NHS Trust which is primarily around the mental health support services.  We also want to make sure there are updates with regards to The Bridge and that these are distributed.

I understand that Rethink recently presented at the Harrow User Group’s and we are awaiting feedback.  They have confirmed to the Council that it is going to be a fully staffed service and there are going to be permanent members by the end of October. 

Given those commitments, we also need to make sure that that is carried through and you have my personal guarantee that I will be overseeing this and making sure that officers drive it forward.  In the transition period, Rethink have been using staff from elsewhere and that is understandable but we want to see a more permanent focused team on Harrow.

The people who used Marlborough Hill in the past were fully informed of that change and have been helped through that transition.  If that has not been the case or if people feel they need further assistance, please let me know and we can see what we can do to assist.

In relation to Personal Budgets, I think they are important but then they are actually something separate to this and so we need to just disentangle that item out a little bit and make sure that we are giving support where it is required and needed.

Supplemental Question:

In relation to developments at The Bridge Day Centre, would you agree that Rethink Mental Health Illness should not be using The Bridge as a vehicle for their own promotion as an organisation, which appears to be the case at the moment, and they should be putting more of the Council funded resources into engaging currently marginalised individuals to benefit from this service?  For example, at the moment there is no information in the whole building about services other than Rethink.

Supplemental Answer:

I think that is a valid concern to raise and it is something I will certainly look into.  I believe that if you have got a range of services available, they should be signposted so that people can find what is most appropriate to them.  The whole idea about personal budgets you have raised is to give users real choice and control on what is appropriate for their lives, their services and their caring needs.

Now if we have got a contractor who is just promoting themselves and provide a very narrow set of options, that may not be the right thing for a number of the clients going there.  I want to make sure that we have as wide a choice as possible because everyone of us is different, everyone’s needs are slightly different and we need therefore to make sure that the widest range of services are available, signposted so that we can get the right level and the appropriate support where we need it.  So perhaps we can include that as part of our discussions.

Questioner:

ManishaAhya

Asked of:

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Adults and Housing

Question:

For the Council commissioned Transforming Mental Health Personalisation contract being delivered by NDTI, how may Mental Health Service Users have been involved to feedback their experiences of mental health personal budgets in Harrow and how many organisations in relation to their contracted target?

Answer:

Thank you for your question.

Unfortunately, I do not actually have those figures available because the project is still underway and the final figures have yet to be collated.  As soon as they are, I will make sure that they are widely disseminated so that people can understand the numbers and the uptake.  We also need to ensure that the people taking up these services are happy with what is being provided and that it is meeting their needs.

I will be very happy to meet with you with any concerns you have about this.

Supplemental Question:

What is the total contract value of the project paid to NDTI to date and therefore what is the current cost to Harrow for each person consulted and would you, as a Portfolio Holder, regard these as good value for money?

Supplemental Answer:

I do not have that data to hand but if I may come back to you within the next few days with exact details.  I am keen to make sure that we have value for money. 

Once we have seen the numbers who are taking it up, against the amount of money that has been assigned to this contract, we will be looking carefully at it because the Council’s got a very limited pot of money.  We need to make sure that that money is put into the right places to support as many people as possible to get the best outcomes as we can.  If we are putting large amounts of money and not really affecting anyone’s lives materially better, then that is a real concern.  So I will make sure that we feed that back to you and report back at the next Cabinet meeting with this information.

Questioner:

Carol Martin

Asked of:

Councillor Tony Ferrari, Portfolio Holder for Finance

[Written response provided by Councillor Susan Hall, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Community Safety and Environment]

Question:

In the Harrow Observer dated 10^th October you stated that the last Conservative administration had rejected the idea of not locking the parks in Harrow because of the impact it could have on residents who live nearby and enjoy using them.  You went on to say that the Conservative Group will ensure parks are kept locked for as long as the Conservative Group are in control of the Council.

The Council Leader, Councillor Susan Hall, has stated that the Conservative priorities will be to make Harrow cleaner, safer and fairer. 

In order to ensure fairness across the whole of Harrow, will Cllr Ferrari please advise when the gates on the parks in Roxbourne, which were removed under a previous conservative administration, will be reinstated and when they will be locked?

At the request of the questioner, the following written response was provided.

Written Response:

The Conservative Administration is committed to reinvesting the potential savings from the proposal to cease park locking to allow the service to continue at its' current level.  The Park Locking service is managed by the Council and is operated in partnership with the Police and residents groups.

The service locks car parks, cemeteries and parks based on target information supplied by residents and the Police.  Priority parks are defined by those either in a sensitive area, suffering raised anti-social behaviour, having a history of ASB or are capable of being effectively secured.  Currently the Council locks a third of our Parks and Open Spaces.

I am aware of two parks in the Roxbourne area which are missing a gate.  Roxbourne Park, a park where we lock the car park only which has a missing hand gate to one of the entrances, the gate was damaged two years ago by contractors working on the adjacent railway land. I will ask officers to look into a possible replacement for this gate, given the circumstances surrounding its removal.

A five bar gate at Newton Ecology Park was stolen 4-5 years ago, this park has Permissive Rights for free access and the gate is not essential.

To ensure fairness intelligence of anti-social behaviour is monitored and where we are aware of changing patterns of behaviour locking priorities are adapted to ensure the most effective service for the residents of Harrow.

Questioner:

Adolphus Pais

Asked of:

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Adults and Housing

Question:

The previous administration proposed the development of Whitchurch Playing Fields which was flawed in so many aspects and was opposed by the majority of residents in the area and by all the Councillors of Belmont Ward and good many other Councillors of the current administration.  Now that there has been a change of administration and the current administration is not compelled to pursue the flawed development for which there is no support among the residents, why does the current administration not withdraw the Council’s objection to the Village Green Application and register this land as a Village Green notwithstanding the outcome of the Inquiry?

Answer:

Thank you for your question.

As you know, my colleagues, including the Leader, and I have been concerned by the proposals and have lobbied for and campaigned against the proposals on Whitchurch Consortium over, not just a few days, few weeks, few months but several years.

We are unfortunately in a process where there is an Inquiry to establish whether or not it is a Town & Village Green.  We think that it is the prudent course of action to let that Inquiry run its course because if it is established as a Town & Village Green, then that will instantly block any transfer to Whitchurch Consortium.  If the outcome is different, we will be looking again at what is the most appropriate thing going forward.

We need to understand there is an Inquiry in process and I understand that we ought to be following that until such time the Inquiry makes a decision one way or another.

MrPais:

Did I understand that right that you actually said if the decision goes against the Village Green application, you would let that project go forward as it is?

Cllr Macleod-Cullinane:

We would very much have to look again at that situation.  Things have changed.  I have made arguments all along that there did not seem to be a change in the economic case that the transfer to the Consortium was being based on.  I think there are a lot of issues around it and would like to look again at that point – that is my personal view.  At the moment, the Council has got a process and it should be followed through and that is where we will be waiting to see what the outcome of the Village Green application is and then taking a view at that point.

Supplemental Question:

The residents well understood that the current administration in opposition supported the Village Green application.  Indeed, the current Deputy Leader, you in particular, strongly supported and defended the application in front of the Inspector as you have just said yourself, on behalf of the residents of the constituency.

Has there been a change of heart on this matter and if so, why?  Does the Council have alternative plans for this site and does it intend to carry on with the previous administration’s proposals?

Supplemental Answer:

I have not changed my position at all.  I still think that the transfer is the Consortium is wrong.  That is my personal view.  We are, as the administration, very much in favour of looking to see the outcome of that Inquiry.  If the Inquiry finds in favour of the Village Green, then what happens next is somewhat moot.

I do not think at the moment that we can pre-judge what the outcome of the Inquiry will be and we would have to take a view but, as far as I am concerned, we have not changed our view from what we said a few weeks or a few months’ ago.  We still think that there is an issue there and that needs to be resolved.