Agenda and minutes

1.1  Following formal nominations for the position of Chair, Councillor Rick Muir was elected by the Members as Chair of Governance and Resource Scrutiny Commission.

1.2  The Chair advised the Commission would not be electing a Vice Chair at this meeting.  The opposition group were invited to appoint a member to the Commission. It is hoped they will appoint a Member to the Commission at the next Full Council meeting on 22nd July 2015.

2.1  Apologies for absence were received form Cllr Deniz Oguzkhanli and Cllr Will Brett.

3.1  None.

4.1  The Chair advised the Council’s Standards Committee asked all Chairs of Committees, Sub committees and Scrutiny Commissions to remind Members at the first ordinary meeting of their responsibilities regarding ethical governance.

4.2  The Chair read out the following:

Members will be aware of their responsibilities under the Code of Conduct as they relate to transparent and lawful decision making and declaration of pecuniary interest where appropriate.

All Members will have received relevant training and guidance from the Council’s Monitoring Officer to ensure that compliance with the Code is understood.  For those Members of the Planning Sub and Licensing Sub Committees this is supplemented by the relevant Sub-Committee’s Code of Practice together with additional training to support those Members in discharging their duties as decision makers.

The Council’s Standards Committee, has asked all Chairs of committees and sub-committees to raise with their members under this item on the agenda the need to be mindful of our responsibilities under the Code of Conduct and the relevant Code of Practice at all times.

Advice to Members relating to Declaration of Interests are included in the agenda pack for each and every meeting and it is important to remember that for every item upon which we are asked to make a decision we ask ourselves the question whether we do have a relevant declarable interest which may prevent us participating in the taking of that decision.

If unclear about whether or not to declare an interest whether pecuniary or non-pecuniary the Member should seek advice from the Monitoring Officer in advance or from the legal officer at the meeting.

It is important that on all matters on which we are asked to make a decision we act and are seen to act fairly, without prejudice and within the law.

Fundamentally we must always have regard to matters which are relevant to our decision and disregard matters which are not relevant and at all times conduct ourselves in a manner which will not bring either ourselves or the Council into disrepute.

4   

5   

5.1  Minutes of the previous meeting held on 16^th March 2015 were approved.

6 

7 

5   

6   

6.1  The Chair welcomed Donna Molloy, Head of Implementation from Early Intervention Foundation.

6.2  The Chair outlined the context of the review; highlighting the Commission invited Early Intervention Foundation (EIF) to talk about their work specialising in early intervention.  The aims of their work is to shift spending, action and support for children and families from late to early intervention.

6.3  The substantive points from the presentation were:

6.3.1  Graham Allen MP and Iain Duncan Smith MP co-authored a report “Early Intervention: good parents, great kids, better citizens”.  Graham Allen MP is an advocate for early intervention and produced 2 reports for the Coalition Government in 2011. 

6.3.2  One of the recommendations was to establish an independent organisation to champion and support the effective use of early intervention to tackle the root causes of social problems for children from conception to early adulthood.  The Independent organization set-up was Early Intervention Foundation which was launched in 2013 with 3 years funding from 4 Government departments.

6.3.3  EIF has 3 main functions: to assess the evidence; advise commissioners on how to apply the evidence; advocate for early intervention.  The focus of their work is on children and families.

6.3.4  Early Intervention is about getting additional, timely and effective support to children who need it – enabling children to flourish and preventing costly, long-term and damaging outcomes.  Providing ttargeted, preventive activity, for children (from conception -19/24 and families).  Supporting parenting and family life, social and emotional skills, mental health, literacy and language and behavior.

6.3.5  Early intervention is key to:

·  Tackling the root causes of social problems

·  Improving children’s life chances, breaking the often intergenerational cycle of disadvantage

·  Reducing the cost of failure to the taxpayer

6.3.6  Using publically available data collated mainly from local authorities; the spending on late intervention for children and young people (in 1 fiscal year) was highlighted.  Data specific to London Borough of Hackney was highlighted and the officer advised Hackney has 2 areas of spend that are higher than the national average.

6.3.7  Evidence from economic and social research, established over many years, supports the following principles:

·  Wide and persistent gaps in children’s wellbeing and development emerge very early in life  70% of the gap in attainment is present at age 7 and this becomes difficult to close as time goes on for that young person

·  These factors have important consequences for future and intergenerational outcomes.

·  These factors are not set in stone immediately, and can be influenced by timely intervention

·  Programmes which successfully improve these factors deliver substantial individual and social benefits over time.

6.3.8  The key elements of an effective early intervention strategy to reduce demand are:

·  Using evidence and data about where the real need is 

·  Breaking down silos - integrated services/teams in localities with shared systems/processes

·  Evidence based Interventions that meet local priorities

·  A focus on frontline practice – permissive environments in which professionals have the flexibility and scope to deliver what’s needed and make real change

·  Using the reach  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1  The Chair referred to the reports in the agenda:

·  Preventing Depression and Anxiety in Working Age Adults by Health in Hackney Scrutiny Commission.

·  The 21^st Century Public Servant by Dr Catherine Needham and Catherine Mangan from University of Birmingham / Economic Social Research Council and Public Service Academy.

7.2  The Chair informed the Commission that the officers from University of Birmingham were unable to attend this meeting date and offered to provide a copy of their report for the commission to review.

7.3  Members were asked to note the reports.

Members noted the reports.

8.1  The Governance and Resources Scrutiny Commission, commissioned BDRC Continental to carry out qualitative research with local residents to show case the ‘customer journey’; to help understand the triggers, barriers and their interaction with current local services for the LT unemployed.  BDRC conducted 24 qualitative in-depth interviews with residents who are long term unemployed in Hackney.  The participants were a mixture of people with and without a mental illness.  The participants were recruited through the support organisation they were working with.  The age range of the participants was 33-57.

8.2  The aim of this research is to reduce duplication of support and services to the same individual and to support the redesign of services in the system around early intervention or at the point of need.

8.3  The final report was received and circulated to Members in advance of the meeting.  Copies of the report were available at the meeting.

8.4  The Chair welcomed Jacqui Banerjee, Director and Sally Mimnagh, Research Manager from BRDC Continental. The officers outlined the main findings from the research.  The key points highlighted at the meeting were:

8.4.1  The research participants were grouped into 4 categories.  Two of the categories have high need.  The people in the high need category were mainly from the older age group.

8.4.2  The participants with a mental illness were better supported and had a support network around them.

8.4.3  The research highlighted that participants were frustrated with the system and seem to go round and round. 

8.4.4  The employment support provided by organisations was largely generic.

8.4.5  After speaking with participants the main causes of unemployment were: redundancy, mental health or changing their career.

8.4.6  All the participants interviewed wanted to work.

8.4.7  Barriers to employment identified were:

·  Taking Low paid job roles.  This was a key issue for people renting in the private sector

·  The cost of courses.  These were courses related to the individuals career aspiration

·  Support and help available for 18-24 year olds but nothing for over 25s.

8.4.8  People on JSA had more pressure to find employment than people on ESA.

8.4.9  The organisation participants expressed the biggest frustration with was Renasi who provided support for the Job Centre Plus (JCP) work programme.

8.4.10  The organisation ‘Peter Bedford’ appeared to offer a support service that worked well; this was tailored to individual need.

8.4.11  Hackney Community College have a case worker approach and this seemed to work well too.

8.5  Discussion, Questions and Answers

(i)  Members referred to the 4 categories and enquired who had the highest need for support.

The BDRC officers advised people without a mental illness had the highest support need because they received no support.

(ii)  Reflecting on the research and from observations Members noted that participants appeared to have a strong connection with the support organisation they were accessing.

(iii)  A number of points were made in the discussion these were:

·  Members wanted to find out if there was trust in the system or only in specific services

·  People were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

5   

6   

7   

8   

9   

9.1  The Governance and Resources Scrutiny Commission held two meetings in spring 2014 to consider the Council’s journey to paying all of its staff, including contractors, a London Living Wage. At the time of the Commission’s inquiries, Hackney was one contract away from being a total London Living Wage employer.

9.2  The Commission sent a ‘Letter of Reference’ to the Cabinet Member for Finance asking questions about the Council’s work to further promote and strengthen the London living wage both within the Council and more widely.

9.3  The Executive response to the letter was on pages 123-130 of the agenda.

9.4  The Cabinet Member for Finance from London Borough of Hackney explained the Council did make changes to its contract with the provider and the issue about change of hours was interesting and complex.  The Cabinet Member agreed to keep a watching brief on the situation.

9.5  Members noted the Cabinet response.

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

10.1  The Chair referred to the draft work programme on pages 131 – 138 in the agenda.

10.2  The Chair advised the Overview and Scrutiny officer was consulting with relevant officers and stakeholder about scheduling the proposed discussion items into the work programme. 

10.3  The work programme will be updated as confirmations are received.  The following items were confirmed for the work programme:

·  Elections Update July 2015

·  ICT Review Recommendation Update and ICT Strategy in September 2015

·  Annual Complaints Report September 2015

·  HR Strategy October 2015

·  Welfare Reform Update April 2016.

10.4  The Corporate Director of Finance informed the Commission there was no clear indication about the impact of the Government’s announcement on Right to Buy 2 or how it will operate on a local or national level.  It is anticipated there will be a consultation by the Government about their proposals.  Once details are received the Commission will be updated.

11.1  None.