Agenda, decisions and minutes

1.1  Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Michael Desmond, Cllr Clare Joseph, Cllr Clare Potter, Cllr Steve Race, Cllr Ifraax Samatar and Cllr Claudia Turbet-Delof.

1.2  Cllr Ali Sadek and Cllr Sarah Young attended the meeting virtually.

1.3  Cllr Eluzer Goldberg and Cllr Michael Levy were recorded as absent.

1.4  Cllr Carole Williams attended the meeting virtually in her capacity as the Cabinet Member for Employment, Human Resources and Equalities.

Members are invited to consider the guidance which accompanies this agenda and make declarations as appropriate.

2.1  None.

To consider and agree the minutes of the previous meeting held on 12 September 2023 and also to consider and note the actions (and updates) from the September and June meetings.

Updates on actions from the June meeting are included.

The minutes of the previous meeting, held on 12 September 2023, be approved as an accurate record of those meeting’s proceedings.

3.1  The Corporate Committee members considered and agreed the minutes of their previous meeting, held on 12 September 2023.

RESOLVED:

The minutes of the previous meeting, held on 12 September 2023, be approved as an accurate record of those meeting’s proceedings.

Matters Arising

Data on occupancy and usage levels for Council buildings

3.2  The Governance Officer stated that on the 7 November 2023 the Council’s Strategic Director Customer and Workplace had contacted him confirming that there were in 1,273 workstations in the Hackney Service Centre (HSC) and normal occupancy levels were c 400-600 (and have been increasing noticeably). The Governance Officer confirmed that he was still seeking details on who the freeholder or leaseholder was for each Council building.

  Action status – Ongoing

External Contractors – Domestic Abuse policy

3.3  Hackney Council’s Director of Human Resources and Organisational Development stated that currently there was not a requirement in place for the Council’s external contractors to have in place a domestic abuse policy. Contractors could be encouraged to have a policy in place but it was not a requirement. The current legal advice had stated that the Council should not insist that the Council’s external contractors to have in place a domestic abuse policy.

3.4  Councillor Binnie-Lubbock suggested contacting the Council’s Procurement Services to include some wording to encourage external contractors to have in place a domestic abuse policy. The Council’s Director of Human Resources and Organisational Development replied that the Council was seeking to include some wording in the Council’s procurement policies that encourages external contractors to consider adopting a domestic abuse policy.

3.5  The Chair of the Committee highlighted that the Council’s domestic abuse policy had recently garnered some good publicity as part of the United Nations’ recent ‘Unite to End Violence against Women Campaign’.

  Action status – Resolved

Local authorities – domestic abuse policy

3.6  The Council’s Director of Human Resources and Organisational Development reported that other local authorities had adopted similar domestic abuse policies. However, it was highlighted that those Councils potentially did not have as wider remit as Hackney Council in terms of being able to adapt to the specific needs of individuals. Hackney Council had undertaken policies different to other local authorities in enabling a broader and more appropriate use of the time that had been agreed in helping individuals in ways that are suitable to individuals’ own circumstances. The next stage for Hackney Council was to promote its policy and to promote different areas to encourage managers to be aware so that can implement that policy much more broadly with a degree of flexibility.

3.7  The Cabinet Member for Employment, Human Resources and Equalities reported on 7 November 2023 the following:

London Councils has written to London boroughs whether they pay domestic abuse leave. Data is still coming in but I understand that, of the 14 boroughs that have responded so far, five offer. Four have special leave (not specifically domestic abuse leave. The majority of councils have not yet responded.

More responses may  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

The deadline for questions from members of the public is 12 noon on Wednesday 6 December 2023). If a member of the public wishes to submit a question they can do so by emailing governance@hackney.gov.uk.

A supplementary agenda setting out any public questions received after the publication of the main agenda will be circulated shortly after this deadline.

If the Chair agrees, a member of the public can ask a question at the Committee without having given notice. If a question without notice is asked, the Chair will explain that it might not be possible to give a full answer at the meeting and that a written response will be provided. 

4.1  None.

No questions have been submitted from Councillors.

5.1  None.

Standing item

This was a standing agenda item. No update was provided at the meeting.

To agree the Pay Policy 2024/2025 and recommend Council to approve it.

7.1  The Committee noted that under the Localism Act 2011 Hackney Council was required to publish an annual pay policy statement.  The draft statement updates the 2023/24 statement and was approved by Hackney Council. The 2024/25 statement had to be approved by a resolution of the Council before 31 March 2024. Committee members noted in the published report that there had been no substantive changes to the policy. The statement details current pay practice, and no new policy principles were being introduced.

7.2  There was brief discussion about the report wherein the following points were noted:

·  At paragraph 5.2 of the published report it was noted that Hackney Council was facing considerable challenges in implementing the nationally  negotiated pay deal for 2023/24 which has averaged around 6%, surpassing the initially budgeted 4% for 2023/24;

·  National pay agreements were negotiated at central government level which Hackney Council, like other local authorities, were provide a view on. The negotiation took a considerable amount of time and Hackney Council in response would try to forecast as much as possible ahead of those negotiations;

·  Chief Executive’s pay in comparison to the median total pay the ratio had gone down. Chief Executive’s salary was a ‘spot salary’, which was a single hourly/weekly pay rate, or a single annual salary, attached to each job.  At the time there was recruitment campaign for  a Chief Executive there would a salary review of what the spot salary should be and benchmarking would be included as part of that process. The Chief Executive’s pay would rise in line with the nationally negotiated pay agreements. What then could occur was that the gap was then narrowed based on other negotiations for different levels of colleagues in pay and salary. This too was very much impact by negotiations made at central government level. To some extent the percentage of awards to the Chief Executive groups had been less than those in the much more junior and less paid workforce;

·  The report included benchmarking information with a selection of Boroughs that neighbour Hackney or were considered comparable. Hackney Council needed to understand the roles that it had and the opportunities that it was seeking to advertise in the future with the Council being mindful of the comparative salaries. Most of the local authorities would use the same job evaluation schemes so that they would be broadly similar and it would allow Hackney Council to retain those staff that they need;

·  Hackney Council had in place a mechanism to take into account instances when there was high salary demands. Benchmarking was used when taking into account Market Supplements. Where extensive research was undertaken by the Council around salaries that were paid and was aligned with workforce shortages and where the Council had tried and was proved that the Council had been unable to recruit to a role. It was not common practice within the borough as the Council was able to attract candidates as best it could. Where there was challenges the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Verbal update

8.1  The Council’s Assistant Director, Policy and Strategic Delivery gave a brief overview of the Strategic Plan. The plan would provide the means in which the Council could bring together all of the commitments, political and actions responding to community needs and pressing issues in a way that was agile and adaptable enough to be a framework that sets a direction that could be reviewed and amended over time.

8.2  The Strategic Plan would also allow the Council to be an enabler working in partnership community and statutory partners and local residents. This way the plan was not just about delivery but also about the relationship with those aforementioned groups. The plan was about the borough’s priorities and the Council’s role as an enabler, convenor as well as having the accountability for delivery.

8.3  Under the Strategic Plan implementation would be multi-level, breaking it down into parts whose delivery could be tracked, however this would not be the only aspect of the plan. The Strategic Plan would set out outcomes and deliveries but also how the Council was tracking those deliverables and whether there was an impact on the long term outcomes. It was important for the plan to identify all the cross cutting actions that also need to be tracked, this was the focus of the Strategic Plan was how the Council would get to the outcomes when no one service was responsible for any of the long term outcomes.

8.4  The recent Strategic Plan briefing with Committee members in October included details about partnership working and the implementation plan which would be supported by strong internal communications and engagement. The Strategic Plan would also assist the Council in shaping its narrative so that it was then guided by the communication strategy that was being developed. The Council’s Assistant Director, Policy and Strategic Delivery suggested to the Committee that they should consider how partnership working fits in with their remit and the focus on regulatory services. Clear links had been identified between several pieces of work and the impact on local communities which in turn could become an issue for the Strategic Plan.

8.5  The Committee noted that the Chairs of both the Council’s Audit Committee and Scrutiny Panel would look at the Strategic Plan challenge to see how it was coming across in the delivery and whether any issues need to be escalated particularly by the Scrutiny Panel.

8.6  The presentation slides, Developing and Embedding the Strategic Plan, from the October briefing, would be shared with the Committee after the meeting by the Governance Officer.

8.7  There was a brief discussion wherein the following points were noted:

·  There had been a delay in the timetable for the various phases of the Strategic Plan.  A detailed timetable would be circulated to Committee by the Council’s Assistant Director, Policy and Strategic Delivery;

·  The various phases of the Strategic Plan were working in tandem with one another;

·  There was no delay in implementation. Work was under way to ensure that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To note the Business Regulation - Service Plan Update report and appendices.

To note the latest version of the Corporate Committee Work Programme

2023/2024.

Business Regulation – Service Plan Update

9.1  The Council’s Regulatory Service Manager, of the Community Safety, Enforcement and Business Regulations Team, introduced the update report as published. The report provided an update on the performance of the Environmental Health Service against the Service Plan for the 2023/24 to the end of quarter 2, and the work undertaken to improve the quality of food premises in Hackney to protect the health of the public, to assist businesses to comply with their legal requirements.

9.2  The report also highlighted the work of Hackney Trading Standards for 2023/24 to the end of quarter 2. The plan outlines the Service’s achievements and identifies areas of interest for the future.

9.3  There was brief discussion about the report whereby the following points were noted:

·  The Committee noted that across the service there remained staff shortage issues;

·  Regarding Hackney’s Hospitality industry progress was being made to return the sector to pre-pandemic levels. There had been seen a large explosion of businesses with 3600 business currently. This remained a challenge for the Council;

·  For bars and clubs in the borough it appeared to be back to normal in the post-pandemic period and the Council would have to adapt as different strains of Covid19 emerge in the future and to adhere to any guidance as it follows;

·  On Food Safety Performance against Service Key Performance Indicators 2023/24 and the number of unrated food premises, on average the Service receives 75 new registrations a month. 303 inspections had already been undertaken. 452 businesses had ceased trading, moved out of the borough or had been duplicated on the system. There remained 226 businesses and two officers were working full time to reduce that number. The service was confident that the figure could be reduced and funds had been allocated to employ agency staff to assist in reducing the 226 figure;

·  In terms of prioritising those 226 businesses, in order to reduce the backlog, the Service would firstly contact the businesses in question to determine if they are actually trading. It was a  process of working through the registrations systematically;

·  The Management Information System was currently being implemented and it was expected to be in operation at the start of the next quarter;

·  In relation to guidance given to businesses in relation to ventilation post-pandemic there was no formal guidance beyond those buildings regulations required by law that a new business has to adhere to before it opens. Central government regulations had not changed. Those regulations in place during the height of the Covid19 were only temporarily in place.

Gender and Equalities Pay Gap report

9.4  The Committee noted that the report was not ready, however, the report had been seen by the Committee previously and it was currently unclear what decisions were previously made leading to the report being on the Committee’s Work Programme. Further inquiries were needed as to the history of the report being included.

9.5  Councillor Webb highlighted that part of the Committee’s responsibilities was oversight of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Edmonton Incinerator

10.1   Councillor Binnie-Lubbock suggesting adding the Edmonton Incinerator to the Committee’s Work Programme and whether there was an opportunity to reduce the amount of waste going to the incinerator and reduce its impact on the environment. The Legal Officer replied that it was not immediately clear where that issue would come under in the Committee’s terms of reference.  The Chair suggested that in terms of the Terms of Reference it may fall under those non-executive functions not allocated to the Committee. The Chair suggested that further work was required to determine which Council Committees’ remit covered the Edmonton Incinerator specifically in relation to waste services and climate change.

Committee members visit of the Councils’ buildings off campus

10.2  The Chair stated that various steps had been by the Governance Officer to look into a visit by Committee member of various Council buildings off campus. The Governance Officer added that they had contacted various Council libraries and a date early next year had been secured for Committee members to visit two libraries.

10.3  Committee members briefly discussed the need to obtain further data regarding occupancy and usage levels for Council buildings. The Governance Officer would contact the Council’s Strategic Director Customer and Workplace, Customer and Workplace to clarify; a) what the terms of reference were for the original Committee Members’ May 2023 visit to the Hackney Service Centre (HSC) and; b) Post-pandemic period had there been any concern raised about some of the Council buildings having lower than expected occupancy levels.  Pending further information received relating to those two matters the Governance Officer would put on hold any arrangements for Committee members' visit to the Council’s off campus buildings.

Action:

The Governance Officer would check with his equivalents for the Council’s Scrutiny Committees to determine which Scrutiny Committees’ remit would cover any work relating to the Edmonton Incinerator.

Action:

The Governance Officer would:

1.  Contact the Council’s Strategic Director Customer and Workplace, Customer and Workplace requesting further data regarding occupancy and usage levels for Council buildings;

2.  Contact the Council’s Strategic Director Customer and Workplace, Customer and Workplace to clarify:

a)  what the terms of reference were for the original Committee Members’ May 2023 visit to the Hackney Service Centre (HSC) and;

b)  Post-pandemic period had there been any concern raised about some of the Council buildings having lower than expected occupancy levels;

3.  Pending further information received from for 2) and 3), put on hold any arrangements for Committee members' visit to the Council’s off campus buildings.

The Committee members noted that their next meeting was on 13 March 2024.