Agenda and minutes

Cabinet - Monday 11 December 2017 5.00 pm

Venue: Bolney Meadow Community Centre, 31 Bolney Street, London, SW8 1EZ. View directions

Contact: Henry Langford, Senior Democratic Services Officer, Tel: 020 7926 1065 Email: hlangford@lambeth.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Declarations of Pecuniary Interest

Under Cabinet Rule 1.5.2, where any Cabinet Member has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (as defined in the Members’ Code of Conduct (para. 4)) in any matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council, a committee, sub-committee or joint committee, they must withdraw from the meeting room during the whole of the consideration of that matter and must not participate in any vote on that matter unless a dispensation has been obtained from the Monitoring Officer.

Minutes:

There were none.

2.

Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 207 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 13 November 2017.

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 13 November 2017 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record of the proceedings.

3.

Financial Planning Report 2017/18 to 2019/20 pdf icon PDF 541 KB

    Key decision

    All wards

     

    Deputy Leader of the Council (Finance & Resources), Councillor Imogen Walker

    Strategic Director Corporate Resources, Jackie Belton

     

    Contact: Director of Finance, Christina Thompson

    CThompson3@lambeth.gov.uk; 0207 926 5302

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Leader of the Council, Cllr Lib Peck, noted that an agenda supplement had been published on Friday 8th December and circulated to members. She checked that all cabinet members had considered the additional information before proceeding with the consideration of the item.

     

    The Deputy Leader of the Council (Finance and Resources), Cllr Imogen Walker, introduced the report and said the Council once again faced difficult decisions when setting the budget. The money available continued to fall as core funding from government was cut and the revenue generated through council tax and local business rates did not make up the shortfall. Generally it cost more, year on year, to deliver the same services for the people of Lambeth.

     

    Cllr Walker stated that the current Budget made prudent use of the Council’s assets and local services continued to offer good value for money. Further savings had been identified which were projected to reduce the current funding gap from £8.670m to £2.037m. Members were asked to note the proposed Council Tax Support (CTS) scheme, the London Business rates Pilot Pool, and the Capital Investment Programme to 2019/20.

     

    The Director of Finance and Property, Christina Thompson, remarked that while some savings had been identified, the Council needed to manage the entire funding gap. The Medium Term Financial Strategy identified the areas of continued pressure, these included Children’s Social Care staffing, the reduction in the Better Care Fund grant and Special Educational Needs transport costs. The ongoing costs of administering Subject Access Requests (SARs) and the one-off costs associated with the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) were also noted. Ms Thompson then explained the governance arrangements around the London Business rates Pilot Pool and noted that the changes to the CTS would also go to Council in January 2018.

     

    Cabinet members then made the following observations:

    ·         The report laid bare the continued financial difficulties faced by the Council. Such was the extent of previous savings, that it was no longer clear where further changes could be made without putting service users at risk. All additional social care funding was tied up in attempting to balance the budget and did not represent new investment from government.

    ·         The Chairman of the King’s College Hospital Foundation Trust had recently resigned citing NHS funding and unrealistic demands for savings. These pressures also impacted on the Council.

    ·         Adult Social Care spending represented more than a quarter of the Council’s overall budget and the services were largely demand led. Demand was increasing and so too was the cost. The Better Care Fund (BCF) was the key to ongoing provision of services.

     

    In response to questions from members, Christina Thompson provided the following information:

    ·         The BCF funding formed part of the Council’s base budget and the additional grant funding of £13m would be received over three years. Current financial pressures in Adult Social Care of approximately £4.5m were offset by the grant received to date. In order to manage the pressures identified in 2021, when the grant was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

4.

Herne Hill Forum application for neighbourhood area and forum designation pdf icon PDF 245 KB

    Key decision

    Coldharbour, Thurlow Park & Herne Hill

     

    Cabinet Member for Planning, Regeneration and Jobs: Matthew Bennett

    Strategic Director Neighbourhoods and Growth: Sue Foster

     

    Contact: Catherine Carpenter, Delivery Lead Planning Strategy and Policy

    ccarpenter@lambeth.gov.uk; 020 7926 1251

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Cabinet Member for Planning, Regeneration and Jobs, Cllr Matthew Bennett, introduced the report and thanked the Herne Hill Forum (HHF) for their considerable work up to this point. The process had highlighted the challenges of drawing local boundaries for the purposes of neighbourhood plans. Many objections had been received to the original proposed area in Lambeth and consequently a number of areas had been excluded from the final area proposed for designation. Justifications for the final inclusion or exclusion of various areas was provided in the report. It was noted that by revising the boundary, the neighbourhood forum application would fail on a technicality; this however could be addressed moving forward.

     

    The Delivery Lead Planning for Strategy and Policy, Catherine Carpenter, explained that the recommendation to Cabinet was not to designate the area as applied for by the HHF, but to designate a smaller neighbourhood area without areas F, G, H and I (as outlined in the report). However, three of the 21 individuals listed in the forum application now lived or worked outside of the area recommended for designation. Consequently, the Herne Hill neighbourhood forum did not meet the statutory requirement to have a minimum of 21 members living or working in the designated area. It was therefore recommended to refuse the neighbourhood forum application and direct officers to discuss with the HHF the possibility of submission of a revised application quickly.

     

    The Vice-Chair of the Herne Hill Forum, Mr Yan Hawkins, then addressed the committee and raised concerns with officers’ interpretation of the HHF application, in particular relating to the areas now excluded from the proposed designated area. Issues included:

    ·         HHF had evidence that Areas F, I and G were associated, in the majority, with Herne Hill.

    ·         Locality guidance had been followed when consulting residents. A working group was organised and all local representative associations had been consulted. The process was overseen by a Lambeth consultation/communications officer.

    ·         In areas F and I, the majority of residents said they associated with Herne Hill. The officers’ consideration of these areas included that SE5 Forum was active there and did not want to be part of the neighbourhood plan. This statement was not substantiated.

    ·         Another objection related to Area F was false.

    ·         Officers’ comments that the data concerning areas F and I was ‘mixed’, was misleading. The report too often focused on the minority views of those who responded to consultations.

    ·         The HHF application acknowledged the blurring of boundaries and attested that multiple areas would benefit from the neighbourhood planning process. The process would not prevent areas of Herne Hill from being associated with other areas. For example, the development of a masterplan in Loughborough Junction did not have to be mutually exclusive.

    ·         Area H, the waste site, had a history of impact on the Herne Hill community and appropriate to consider for neighbourhood planning involvement if re-classified.

    ·         Paragraph 2.40 was outdated as Southwark Council have since decided that the velodrome was in favour of the Herne Hill designation despite  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

School Place Planning and Capital Programmes pdf icon PDF 272 KB

    Key decision

    All wards

     

    Cabinet Member for Children and Schools: Councillor Jane Edbrooke

    Strategic Director for Children, Adults and Health: Annie Hudson

     

    Contact:

    Maggie Harriott, Education and Strategy Manager

    mharriott@lambeth.gov.uk; 020 7926 2108

    Stuart Dixon, Programme Manager

    sdixon@lambeth.gov.uk; 020 7926 3208

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Children and Schools, Cllr Jane Edbrooke, introduced the report and noted the stark change in circumstances since the Council had written to government in 2011 expressing concern that Lambeth could not meet its demand for school places. Since then, following considerable effort and investment, all targets had been hit and there was now a surplus of school places in the borough. The area of concern moving forward was the projected demand for secondary places and the annual report provided a snapshot of the situation. Circumstances were complicated by government policy to only allow new Free Schools, of which local authorities had only limited influence. A more developed picture of the overall plan to provide school places would follow next year.

     

    The Director of Education and Learning, Cathy Twist, provided further context and noted the sustained increase of primary school places over the last seven years. There had also been an increase in secondary and special school places in the same time period. The Council expected to meet demand for primary places in the next few years and was working to ensure it could do the same for secondary places. As part of this officers were working with the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) to develop plans for a new Free School and would also consider bulge classes if necessary.

     

    Cabinet members then made the following comments in relation to the report:

    ·         The content of the Local Plan needed to be factored into pupil place planning and associated capital programmes. Areas such as Norwood had seen a huge growth in the number of families in recent years and a new school site needed to be sought despite unsuccessful efforts in the past.

    ·         Members were pleased to see the second phase of expansion at Telferscot (New Park Road) but stressed the importance that the EFSA working with the Council to ensure the ongoing identity of the school.

    ·         It was surprising that the EFSA had allowed a new Free School in the borough without duly consulting the Council.

     

    Cathy Twist stated that all the proposed plans in the Local Plan had been factored into the projections for school places. A considerable amount of work had also been undertaken in Norwood to account for the population growth and officers took care to ensure all children were found school places within a reasonable distance of their homes.

     

    Cabinet noted the real improvement in this pupil place planning over recent years and thanked officers for their work.

     

    It was RESOLVED:

     

    1)         To note the planned primary expansions and planned Published Admission Number (PAN) changes for the period 2018 to 2020.

    2)         To note the projections of demand for places and the priority for creating additional secondary school places and to agree the approach to planning additional secondary school places.

    3)         To note the need for an additional secondary school which it is expected will be delivered by the Education and Skills Funding Agency.

    4)         To agree to the proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.

Children and Young People’s Plan pdf icon PDF 139 KB

    Key decision

    All wards

     

    Councillor Jane Pickard, Cabinet Member for Families and Young People

    Annie Hudson, Strategic Director Children’s Services

     

    Contact: Dan Stoten, Integrated Assistant Director, Children’s Commissioning, Children’s Services

    daniel.stoten@nhs.net; 07920 545689

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Cabinet Member for Families and Young People, Cllr Jane Pickard, introduced the report and explained the scope of the Children and Young People’s Plan. She praised the work of the Integrated Assistant Director for Children’s Commissioning and noted that a range of partners that were joined up in the Plan. She also highlighted the significant input from local young people, who had called for a clearer and more integrated service offer, as well as a renewed focus on youth violence and early intervention. Cllr Pickard called on all parts of the community to support the borough’s young people and engage positively with the Plan.

     

    The Integrated Assistant Director for Children’s Commissioning, Dan Stoten, provided further information:

    ·         The Plan was designed to support young people and bring together all local partners in support of a single joined up agenda. It also aimed to combat inequality and create a strong framework for innovation.

    ·         Over a five year period, the Plan would focus primarily on five priority delivery programmes. Mr Stoten provided detailed explanations of the programmes:

    1.    Lambeth Made: Our Children, Our Future campaign;

    2.    A Better Start (0-5 years);

    3.    A New Approach to Early Help (5-19+);

    4.    Children with Special Educational Needs and/or Disabilities;

    5.    Children at risk of harm and Looked After Children.

    ·         The Plan had been developed with in partnership with colleagues in Public Health and was now widely anticipated across a number of local partner organisations.

    ·         The engagement process had been particularly rewarding, with over 400 young people having been consulted. 

     

    Following the presentation, cabinet members made the following contributions:

    ·         Officers and members were encouraged to get involved with the Plan.

    ·         Mr Stoten was thanked for his work and commended for his enthusiasm to improve the lives of young people in Lambeth.

    ·         Members welcomed the individual programme designed for children with disabilities and noted that the needs of this cohort should be considered across the whole Plan. The document stated that young people with disabilities should feel in control of their lives and at home in their communities.

    ·         The Children and Young People’s Plan showed the value of having a unified Public Health department and was symptomatic of the Council’s strong relationship with the CCG. Good results could now be seen on many of the Council’s health priorities and Lambeth had recently been acknowledged as one of the top 5% of boroughs for ensuring social mobility. Despite this, there would always be areas for improvement and the Plan would undoubtedly drive positive change.

    ·         This was a timely report and the ‘Lambeth Made’ brand was applauded. The Plan was a living document and would be actively used by partners moving forward.

    ·         All local partner organisations had a responsibility to cooperate and build the Plan into their everyday practices. The transition periods from early years to the later stages of childhood were crucial.

     

    Mr Stoten acknowledged the comments and said that the Early Help definition would help create a joint strategy for early intervention. A lot of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Q2 Performance Report pdf icon PDF 378 KB

    Non-key decision

    All wards

     

    Deputy Leader of the Council (Finance and Resources), Councillor Imogen Walker

    Strategic Director Corporate Resources: Jackie Belton

     

    Contact: Tim Weetman, Head of Performance, Corporate Resources tweetman@lambeth.gov.uk; 020 7926 6438

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Deputy Leader of the Council (Finance and Resources), Cllr Imogen Walker, introduced the report and noted that it clearly set out the Council’s performance and direction of travel. Whilst there were some areas of concern, cabinet members were working hard with officers to improve them.

     

    The Director of Policy and Communications, Chris Palmer, outlined a number of the key issues:

    ·         The overall employment rate in the borough was the highest level ever recorded. In addition, the gap between the overall employment rate and that of the ethnic minority population was the narrowest it had ever been reported.

    ·         The red RAG ratings within the borough plan priorities identified high levels of litter, detritus and graffiti.

    ·         The number of first time entries to the youth justice system had increased.

    ·         Service KPIs were generally good, however red ratings were shown within Children’s Social Care and some other service areas.

     

    The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, Cllr Jackie Meldrum, noted that the report identified Delayed Transfer of Care (DTOC) from hospital beds as an area of concern. She sought assurances that this would not threaten the Better Care Fund grant received by the Council. In response, the Strategic Director for Adults and Health said there was a lack of statistical analysis on DTOCs because this information came from the NHS and often took time to calculate. However, local performance had improved in recent months and the Secretary of State had not raised it in recent correspondence with the Council. She added that DTOCs were not the best performance indicator and that the Council was focused on keeping people out of hospital in the first place.

     

    It was RESOLVED:

     

    1)         To note the Borough Plan indicators and service indicators set out in the report.

    2)         To endorse the recommendations for further analysis.