Agenda and minutes

1.1  Apologies had been received from Cllrs Coban, Rickard and Kennedy. 

2.1  There were no new or urgent items of business and the agenda was as published. 

3.1   None were declared.

4.1 Members gave consideration to the minutes held on 11^th December 2017.

4.2  Cllr Gordon, asked to make a correction to the minutes of the previous meeting:

·  Paragraph 3.1 should read ‘…an employee of the Government Legal Department…’ rather than ‘…an employee of the Department of Work and Pensions…’.

4.3   The Chair briefly explained that the 4 actions from the last meeting were either going to be covered as a part of this meeting agenda or had been scheduled as agenda items going forward.

4.4  The minutes of the meeting held on 11^th December 2017 subject to the amendments were agreed as a correct record of the last meeting. 

5.1  Members were informed that the Council’s Code of Governance document had been reviewed by the Statutory Officer Group and Hackney Management Team. It had come to the Scrutiny Panel for Members’ consideration before being submitted to the Audit Committee for formal approval.

5.2  The Code of Governance sets out and describes ways in which the Council carries out its functions and the processes to ensure that resources are directed in accordance with agreed policy and that decision making is sound and inclusive.  Accountability is clear for the use of those resources in order to achieve desired outcomes for service users and communities.

5.3  The Chair welcomed Michael Sheffield, Head of Investigations, to the meeting. Before answering Members questions the Head of Investigations made the following substantive points:

·  The revised document was being presented to the Scrutiny Panel for comments because it has implications for the work of the Panel.

·  The revised Code of Governance was an update of the Council’s existing Code of Governance which is based on best practice. It was noted that the Council is not obliged to follow best practice but there is an expectation to do so unless it is justified not to do so.

·  The current draft will go to the Audit Committee for approval with the caveat that it will be subject to further change and review. Changes will take place throughout the year to make it more ‘Hackney specific and in line with the Council’s policies and procedures.

5.4  The Members wanted to better understand how the Council will ensure that effective arrangements and principles in place to manage data are adhered to across the Council. In response the Head of Investigations stated that:

·  Once the document was updated and agreed there will be a need to focus on publishing it more widely than previously, to ensure staff are aware of the document. This will form part of the comprehensive framework of principles around data collection and storage.

5.5  Members expressed the following points, they wanted the Code of Conduct document to be included in the training programme for Councillors alongside guidelines on how to better assess risks. In addition, Members highlighted the importance that data is not only accessible but also available in a usable format in order to improve interactions with and support to residents.

5.6  The Chair confirmed the Code of Governance did not need to be formally endorsed by the Scrutiny Panel.

6.1  The Chair welcomed the Cabinet Member, Group Director of Neighbourhoods and Housing and the senior managers from housing repairs service to the meeting.

6.2  The Chair explained that housing repairs service would normally be scrutinised by the Living in Hackney Scrutiny Commission. However, at the last scrutiny panel meeting Members agreed to discuss this service area at the next meeting of the Scrutiny Panel.  The Scrutiny Panel submitted the following request for information:

·  The Council’s action plan to improve the housing repairs service from the first point of call to the feedback request.

·  Highlight any best practice by other local authorities or Registered Social Landlords that Hackney could learn from to help advance the progress of improvement for the repairs service.

6.3  In response the Cabinet Member made the following substantive points:

·  The report in the agenda provides a wealth of information about the scale of the work for the repairs and maintenance services and the steps being undertaken to make improvements. The report also include benchmarking information where relevant as part of the picture in relation to how Hackney compares to other similar authorities.

·  It was noted that the Council completes approximately 78,000 repairs a year.  87% are carried out by the in-house service (the DLO) and 94% are completed on the first visit; a 2% improvement from last year.

·  Overall, complaints about repairs are less than 1% of the repairs completed, and for the DLO it is 0.6% of the repairs completed.

·  The Council has increased spending on planned works such as fitting new kitchens and bathrooms, replacing roofs and windows and external decorations from £59.3m in 16/17 to a projected £98.9m for 17/18.

·  Overall, the services are delivering an enormous number of repairs and improving the homes of thousands of residents. However, the services are not complacent about the need for service performance improvement and therefore welcome the Scrutiny Panel’s input.

6.4  In addition, the Group Director of Neighbourhoods and Housing made the following substantive points:

·  The top 2 priorities for the Housing Service are performance improvement and the fire safety work.

·  Despite improvement there are still concerns around response rates, inaccurate repairs and the implications of this, as well as issues around the benchmarking of the performance data. Improved performance is essential in order to ensure a better standard of living for those in Hackney Housing.

Questions and Answers

6.5  Members wanted to better understand what is currently in place to and what can be done to increase in-house capacity in relation to repairs. It was noted that currently the DLO perform far better than those contracted to carry out repairs.

6.6  Members also wanted to know more about the development programme in-house, recruitment process for apprentices and the number of apprenticeships.

6.7  In addition, they sought clarification around the framework of contracting in regards to how it benefits the local economy and in terms of wages and conditions.

6.8  In response to the questions above the Head of Building Maintenance and Estate Environment explained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1  The Chair welcomed Ian Williams, Group Director of Finance and Resources, to the meeting. An updated version of the Power Point presentation in the agenda was circulated to Members prior to the meeting.

7.2  Before answering Members questions the Group Director of Finance and Resources made the following substantive points in regards to the Local Government Settlement:

·  There is no additional central government funding.

·  Core Spending Power will increase by 2.1% over SR period, with a 1.5% increase in Core Spending Power in 2018/19.

·  Central government has based their assessment on local authorities increasing their council tax following the flexibility to do so.

7.3  The Members enquired if the Adult social care precept would result in a 6% increase for Council tax over the 3 years. In response the Group Director of Finance and Resources made the following substantive points:

·  It is expected that the Adult social care precept would raised by 6% over the three years and it is anticipated that the Council tax would either be raised by 3% in the first and second year with no increase in the third year or raised by 2% across the three years. The Council has raised it by 2% in the first year and is proposing to raise it with 2% this year and a further 2% in 2019/20.

·  It was pointed out the Secretary of State has based the Core Spending Power around the assumed growth in council tax and the Adult social care precept.

·  It was noted that an increase of 2% in council tax for adult social care and the referendum limit of 1.59% means that the Council can increase the Council tax by 2.99% and by a maximum 4.9%. This has resulted in some local authorities increasing their Council tax by 5.9%.

7.4  The Chair suggested Members would benefit from receiving brief guidance notes around ‘what you can do and cannot do’ in terms of increasing Council tax and Council Tax Bands.

7.5  The Group Director of Finance and Resources explained that 60-65% of households in Hackney fall within Council tax band A and B. In the last 12 hours the government had announced an additional £150 million in funding would be made available for adult social care. Despite this additional funding there was still concern about how to tackle the £7.1 billion funding gap.

7.6  The Group Director of Finance and Resources made the following points in regards to the overall financial position for the current financial year:

·  The reported overspend was £5.563million. This is mainly Adult social care, Children social care and the continuing pressures of Temporary Accommodation.

·  Council tax collection has continued to increase. This year £79.7milllion was collected compared to £74.9million last year. A further 20,000 residents are now paying Council tax via Direct Debit.  This is close to approaching 54,000 households paying Council tax via Direct Debit.

·  The Business Rates devolution, has resulted in an increase to £107.8 million compared to £91.4 million last year.

·  The collection of Housing Benefit  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.1  The Chair welcomed Tim Shields, Chief Executive and Dan Paul Head of HR, OD and Elections to the meeting. The Chair further explained that the Chief Executive had been asked to provide an update on the integration of Hackney Housing with the Council (partly covered under Item 6 of the agenda).

8.2  In addition, the Head of HR, OD and Elections had been asked to provide an update on the planning and provision for the operation of the local elections in May 2018. The Members wanted to know what measures have been put in place to ensure that postal votes arrived in good time. In response the Head of HR, OD and Elections made the following substantive points:

Local Elections:

·  The procedure for postal votes is prescribed and therefore the Council has very little flexibility around the processes.

·  All postal votes are personalised and labelled with their individual Ballot number.  This makes it a time consuming process.

·  The Council will do 4 print runs for postal votes for the local election in May:

·  The first run will contain all of the people that have an active postal vote as of the 5^th March. This should cover the bulk of postal votes, approximately 31,000 electors.

·  The complexity for this particular election is that the Council needs to ensure the postal vote electors also receive the mayoral candidate booklet before they receive their postal vote leaflet.

·  The mayoral candidate booklet was expected to be ready for distribution on or around the 13^th April.  Shortly after this date the first round of postal votes will be distributed.  These are sent by first class post and the expectation is approximately 93% of the postal votes in the first round will arrive the next working day.

·  The second distribution will follow a week later and include those whose postal vote application has been successfully processed (between the 5^th March and early April). This is expected to be a smaller number of postal votes and faster turnaround time.

·  The third distribution contains those who applied from early April to the deadline date of 18^th April at 5pm.

·  The final round contains those who applied to vote by post by the deadline but the application was still pending due to additional information requirements from the elector before processing their postal vote.

·  It was noted that all the dates will be published on the Council’s website.

8.3  It was noted that because the Council has to go through the same processes, in a highly regulated system, such as checking names, verifying documents etc. for each application for a postal vote, the later the elector registers to vote the later their postal vote will arrive. The high volume of ‘last minute’ registrations was highlighted to be the cause of delays to postal votes in the last election.

8.4  Members referred to disabled electors highlighting this cohort mainly applies for postal votes.  Member enquired if their postal votes could be collected. The Head of HR,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.1  The Chair invited the Chief Executive and the Group Director of Finance and Resources to share their thoughts on the Scrutiny function. The Chief Executive and the Group Director of Finance and made the following points:

·  It was noted that regrettably none of the suggestions, of where Scrutiny could add value, from the Chief Executive, over a number of years, have been taken forward. However, it was recognised that scrutiny can play a vital role in unlocking positions around difficult topics.  To illustrate this point the Chief Executive gave the example of the Children and Young People Scrutiny Commission’s investigation into unregistered educational settings in Hackney and further emphasised that it was helpful when Scrutiny taking the topic out into the community and talking with stakeholders, other local authorities and other partners to open up discussions in an objective way.

·  Further, it was noted that the Governance and Resources Scrutiny Commission had provided financial challenge and acted as a welcome forum where officers could have discussions with Members around thorny issues.

·  In light of the cost pressures going forward it was felt that partnership working  between Members and officers will be increasingly important in order to communicate messages and explain to residents the difficult decisions for example SEND budget, debt collection etc.

·  Scrutiny also has a role in cascading in-depth knowledge and expertise around difficult issues while it would be near impossible to immerse all the Members on such a level. 

9.2  In the discussion the following comments and suggestions were made by Members:

·  While a number of Members felt that there was a need for the Scrutiny Panel to expand on its overarching co-ordinating role in order to ensure that reviews are aligned and to ensure suggestions from officers are taken into account.  Including more in-depth discussions looking at how and why we are reviewing certain issues as recommended by the Scrutiny review.

·  It was noted that pitching and defending the work programmes as well as identifying good practice would improve standards and co-ordination.

·  Others felt that this needed to be dealt with outside of the dedicated meetings and referred to holding an offline discussion about the work programmes.

·  Further they raised concerns in regards less output and the best use of the resource. However, they agreed that there is a role for the Scrutiny Panel to provide non-confrontational peer support and to act like a critical friend.

·  Further the following suggestions were made:

o  Look at the possibility of inviting members of the public to discuss policy issues as a way of allowing different communities to have a voice and get their messages across through scrutiny.

o  An additional meeting through the year in order to manage the vast remit of the commissions.

o  Cross-cutting reviews and picking up some off the work from the old Governance & Resources scrutiny commission.

o  Accessing the E-panel and other forms of consultations.

ACTION:  The Head of Scrutiny and Ward Forums to further develop the ideas above and to set-up a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.