Agenda and minutes

1.1  An apology was received from Cllr Coban.

1.2  Cllr Rickard stated that she would have to leave the meeting early.

2.1  There were no urgent items.

2.2  It was agreed that item 7 would be taken first.

3.1  Cllr Gordon stated that she was currently an employee of the Government Legal Department and therefore she would she would absent herself from the third part of item 5 (the Mayor’s Question Time), as it involved a discussion on the implications of the government amending the debt cap for local authorities.

4.1  Members gave consideration to the minutes of the meeting held on 23 October 2017.

4.2  In relation to the Matters Arising, the Chair reported that the Action 1 had been completed, that Action 2 had led to a meeting on the Special Educational Needs funding issue which had just taken place.  Action 3 related to a request for a Member training session on finance and this had now been scheduled for 17 January at 2.00 pm, he added.

5.1  Guest for this item:

·  Mayor Philip Glanville

5.2  The Chair welcomed the Mayor and stated that the three areas they had   invited the Mayor to answer questions on were:

(a)  One Year On – achievements, priorities and learning

(b)  Hackney Council’s communications – update on improvements and future plans

(c)  Housing and welfare reform – implications if the debt cap was lifted

5.3  The Mayor stated that in relation to what he was most proud of during   the year he would single out:

(i)  The Kings Crescent Estate Generation project

(ii)  Having listened to young people in the Hackney A Place for Everyone consultation, the re-focusing the Council’s Employment and Skills offer

(iii)  Enjoying a higher level of engagement with the public and residents

On the first he stated that Kings Crescent was the first project to complete with 273 new homes having been provided. It also represented a useful testing of the financial model they were using.  It also involved retro fitting homes and working with existing residents. It also demonstrated a new and effective marketing strategy whereby the developer Higgins and Hackney Sales had achieved 89% shared ownership sales, with the vast majority going to those who lived or worked in the borough.  Only 3% of the homes had been sold to investors.

On the second he stated that they had listened to young people in the Hackney A Place for Everyone consultation and had re-focused the Employment and Skills offer.  There were now 100 young people in the paid work experience programme, they had relaunched the employment service and 84 out of the 100 apprenticeships on offer had been filled.

On the third he stated that he was enjoying his increased engagement with the public and was proud of introducing the public Mayor’s Question Time sessions, Mayor’s press conferences and overall, being more available to residents.

5.4  In terms of lessons learned, the Mayor stated that he had learned that one cannot do it all and that events would always intervene and upset any plans made.  He added that in the aftermath of Grenfell Tower tragedy there was a collective loss of trust by the public in their councils.  In Hackney however they had proceeded with 1800 fire risk assessments and the data on these was now accessible online.  Valuable lessons had been learnt here on how the Council uses data to increase transparency.  He added that the events around the recent murder on Cassland Rd, or the moped acid attacks had illustrated how there was a need to keep residents groups closely informed and expectations were high here.  The Council was seen as a trusted source to hold the ring in situations like this and this status needed to be maintained. 

5.5  In terms of priorities, the Mayor stated that he wished to highlight three areas.  There was a need for more resources to fund crime and anti-social behaviour, the housing regeneration programme while having got off to a good start would require ongoing political  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.1  Guests in attendance for this item were:

·  Ian Williams, Group Director Finance and Resources (IW)

·  Cllr Rebecca Rennison, Cabinet Member for Finance

6.2  Members gave consideration to briefing paper on ‘Quarterly Financial Update’.

6.3  IW took members through the paper and drew their attention to Appendix 1 the note on the Chancellor’s Autumn Budget 2017.  It was noted that pilots for local retention of full National Non Domestic Rates had been agreed.  Unlike the rest of the country, London as a whole had to agree a single pilot.  The doubling of the council tax for empty properties would also not generate the level of income anticipated by commentators and the other main item of interest was that the roll out of Universal Credit in Hackney had been postponed to October 2018.  This was welcome.  He commented that of the £325m paid out in Housing Benefit in Hackney only £68m relates to council housing stock. There was a discussion on the issues around the unit cost per private property receiving payment. 

6.4  Moving on to Hackney’s own budget position, IW stated that they were awaiting the announcement of the figure for the GLA Precept for the coming year.  The Mayor of London was proposing to increase the Met Police Precept by 1.99%.  In the recent past this had been frozen.  They were currently on a four year financial deal on the RSG and other central government grants were on different cycles.  He expected the final figures to be in line with their financial planning assumptions. 

6.5  The Chair asked how the Council was modelling the risks to Adult Social Care arising from the NHS’s plans, currently out to consultation, to change the Payment System within the NEL STP footprint. 

6.6  IW replied that in Hackney the Integrated Commissioning Board was well advanced on these issues compared to our neighbouring boroughs. There were a number of cost shifting issues that needed to be addressed.  In Learning Disabilities, for example, he had found that the Council was paying costs which should have been taken up by the NHS and he was working closely with the Financial Director of the CCG on these.

6.7  In terms of ongoing budget pressures the cost of funding concession fares had increased very significantly over the past few years.  There was also little movement thus far on the Local Government Pay Award which would have budget implications.  Outer London boroughs for example were reluctant to pay the London Living Wage, he added. 

6.8  A Member asked what could be done about the cost pressures relating to supporting those with No Recourse to Public Funds. 

6.9  IW replied that the Council had a statutory duty to support this group where children were involved.  The Council had set up a Multi Disciplinary Team to deal with these vulnerable families but it was a complex area.

6.10  Members asked about the percentage of rent arrears and National Non Domestic Rates collections being below target.

6.11  IW explained that for a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1  Guests for this item were:

·  Bruce Devile, Head of Business Analysis and Complaints (BD)

·  Cllr Rebecca Rennison, Cabinet Member for Finance

7.2  Members gave consideration to the Annual Report on Complaints and Enquiries.

7.3  In introducing the report BD stated that overall complaints were up 13% which was the highest for a number of years. They were answering them within 20 days, which was outside the 15 day target. At the same time the number of escalations was down indicating that they were resolving more complaints, despite taking a bit more time to do so.  Complaints were dominated by Housing, Parking, Council Tax Benefit and Housing Needs. The increase in volume was being driven by more people using the complaints process itself to further their case e.g. when an appeal might have been turned down.  He stated that there had been one formal report to the Council from the Local Government Ombudsman (finding against the Council). This had related to Adult Social Care and had been presented to Full Council.  He added that complaints to the Mayor’s Office were also slightly up.  Complaints relating to the statutory areas of adult social care and children’s services were also up.  On Quality Assessment there had bene a levelling of performance.  He and his team were continuing to feed back to on a sample of complaints to Management Teams.  They were discontinuing this process where it was seen as not adding value as the focus had to be in ensuring that service areas took ownership of the issues which were arising.

7.4  A Member asked if the target for a Member Enquiry response would continue to be 10 working days. 

7.5  BD replied that he was loathe to move this target to 15 days as speed of response would then slow down. They did consider different targets for different service areas but had decided against it.  Cllr Rennison commented that the outliers here generally impacted the overall performance results for the service, so this needed to be looked at carefully. 

7.6  A Member asked if benchmarking data on Local Government Ombudsman’s Reports could be sought from neighbouring boroughs and included in the next annual report.

7.7  The Chair of Audit Committee stated that this data was a really important way of assessing how we were doing as a borough and he asked how we were now using this data as a diagnostic tool. 

7.8  BD replied that he was continually feeding complaints data to the Chief Executive and Heads of Service and in addition they were looking at how complaints data can best feed into Business Intelligence.  Members asked if next year’s report could also include a couple examples of these processes.

7.9  A Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.1  Members gave consideration to the work programme.  It was noted that the next meeting on 7 Feb there would be a focus on the Budget.  It was agreed to ask for an update on the financial settlement, an update on the Council Tax modelling and an update on any unusual items in the Budget Briefing paper.  IW offered a meeting with Panel Members once the budget proposals were in place. 

8.2  It was agreed that there be an item on Housing Repairs and that the Cabinet Member, the Group Director of Neighbourhoods, the Director of Housing and the Head of Housing Repairs be invited.  The Head of Business Analysis and Complaints was asked to provide an accompanying report on complaints data relating to housing repairs. 

8.3  It was agreed that there be a discussion on how the revised Scrutiny Function was operating.

8.4  Members discussed which upcoming Scrutiny Review reports would go forward to Full Council and in which order.  The following was agreed:

  January Full Council – CSSI report on ‘Vulnerable Migrants’

  February Full Council – Budget setting meeting (no scrutiny item)

  July Full Council – CYP report on ‘Unregistered educational settings’

Oct/Nov Full Council – HiH report on ‘Supporting adult carers’ and WiH report on ‘Changing world of work and skills’.

8.5  The Chair of Audit Committee suggested that the Annual Audit report on Performance should also go to a meeting of Full Council.

8.6  The Chair asked the Chair of Audit and the Chairs of the 4 Commissions to provide a brief verbal update on their latest work.

8.7  The Chair of Audit stated that their focus was on the development of Performance Review as well as keeping an eye on Risk.

8.8  The Chair of Children and Young People Scrutiny Commission stated that they had recently completed reviews on ‘Childcare – 30 hours free entitlement’. In terms of impact of the changes, one provider so far had had to close.  They also completed a Scrutiny in a Day review on ‘Recruitment and support to Foster Carers’.  The challenge here was huge he added.  They were also about to publish the report of their review on ‘Unregistered educational settings’. 

8.9  The Chair of Living in Hackney Scrutiny Commission stated that they had recently done work on the potential for licensing the Private Rented Sector.  They were also looking at homelessness and would be going on site visits to Camden and Lambeth to look at some innovative approaches there.  Next month they would have the Probation Service coming to answer questions and in the pas they had refused to appear at public meetings.  The Commission would also be looking at how the Council monitors it housing contracts. 

8.10  The Chair of Health in Hackney Scrutiny Commission stated that they were coming to the end of their review on ‘Supporting adult carers’.  A number of issues had come up including housing and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.1  There was none.