Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed attendees and new Members of the Committee to the meeting.

The Chair then outlined how the meeting was to proceed; he emphasised that the meeting was primarily for the Committee to discuss and agree its annual Work Programme and workstreams, but that a report on Parks Locking would additionally be heard as the first main item.

The Chair reiterated that this report was for information only and that any questions should be made at the appropriate time and within the context of the report.

The Chair concluded by emphasising the important role Scrutiny had to play in the municipal process in investigating issues of concern to Enfield and that the Committee should endeavour to work collaboratively to ensure this happened effectively. 

To elect the Vice Chair of the Committee.

Cllr Abdullahi NOMINATED Cllr Fonyonga as Vice Chair.

The nomination was SECONDED by Cllr Laban.

Cllr Fonyonga was duly ELECTED Vice Chair of Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

Members of the Council are invited to identify any disclosable pecuniary, other pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests relevant to items on the agenda.

The Chair asked if any Members of the Committee wished to declare any pecuniary interest.  No interests were declared.

The Chair asked if there were any non-pecuniary or any other kind of interest that might compromise a Member’s contribution to the meeting.  No interests were declared.

To receive an update report on Parks Locking from Nicky Fiedler, Assistant Director, Public Realm, further to the Call-In of this matter considered at the Overview & Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 29 October 2014.

The Chair reminded attendees that although consideration of this item would take place under Part 1, there was a Part 2 agenda which contained personal data pertaining to individual residents (for example, email addresses).   The Part 2 agenda was therefore of an administrative nature only, but attendees should exercise discretion when referring to the correspondence therein.

Cllr Anderson, Cabinet Member for Environment, introduced the report as follows:

·         The decision to unlock parks had previously been called-in in October of last year.  It had been agreed that implementation of the decision be suspended until the spring of 2015 to enable consultation with the Police and Friends of the Parks.

·         During the intervening period a considerable number of responses to the consultation had been received.  The report outlined the extent of the consultation.

·         It had been identified that there were particular perceptions around incidents of crime in parks that were of concern to those consulted; reference was made to paragraph 3.6 of the report which mapped out the general perspectives in this regard.

·         Residents were concerned that if fully locked parks were unlocked, there would be a rise in Anti-Social Behaviour and other related types of crime.

·         In general, the Friends of Parks were, however, supportive of unlocking partially locked parks.

·         It had therefore been decided that the 13 parks currently fully locked would remain so.  Those parks currently partially locked would be unlocked, but any toilets or vehicle barriers at these sites would be locked.  Broomfield Park, which previously had been only partially locked due to the presence of a tenant, would also now be fully locked.

·         All parks would, however, be opened whenever contractor access was required.

·         Contractors would be employed to carry out locking and unlocking.

·         The annual saving achieved would be £9,450.

Cllr Anderson concluded by commenting that the above appeared to be the best and most pragmatic way forward and he hoped that residents felt their views had been listened to and taken into account.  He looked forward to establishing positive relationships with the Friends of Parks and was mindful of the valuable work volunteers undertook to help manage the Borough’s parks and open spaces.

The following comments and questions were then taken from Members of the Committee:

Cllr Laban wished the meeting to note that this was not a problem of Cllr Anderson’s making.  She then referred to paragraph 3.5.5 of the report and asked for clarification on the numbers of people for and against the proposals; it appeared that residents who had expressed no view had been assumed to have been supportive of the decision.

Nicky Fiedler responded that officers had met individually with the Friends of Parks and had also written to a number of other residents not directly affected by the proposals.

These residents were contacted on two occasions.  If no response was received, it had been accepted that such residents did not have any particular view on the matter, and were impartial. 

Q:  Appendix 3 refers to robbery and theft in parks  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

The Deputy Leader, Cllr Georgiou, to outline the Cabinet’s priorities for 2015/16.

The Committee to discuss Work Programme items and select the new workstreams for 2015/16.

The Chair invited Cllr Georgiou, Deputy Leader, to outline the Cabinet’s priorities for 2015/16 and to suggest possible scrutiny topics.

Cllr Georgiou proposed the following areas for consideration:

·         Health; in particular:

o   Primary Health Care – are any health inequalities occurring due to the accessibility of services?

o   Improving access to services for those with sensory impairment (for example, the deaf community). 

·         Children and Education, namely:

o   School Places – What has been achieved in terms of provision and what still needs to be done?

o   Standards and Attainment – How well is the Council doing in raising standards and attainment levels?  How do different areas of the Borough compare in these respects?

·         Skills, Learning and Enterprise, including:

o   Young People – are young people adequately prepared for employment or further education?

o   Business Development/Inward Investment – how well is the Council doing to attract new businesses and inward investment to the Borough?

·         Enforcement, in particular:

o   Improving the Council’s ability to enforce on private land (for example, to control vermin or flytipping).

o   Planning – can anything be done to speed up/improve processes?

The Committee then discussed potential workstreams.  It was acknowledged that there should be a balance of shorter and more extended reviews.  Cabinet Members could also be invited to meetings where appropriate.

The Scrutiny Manager referred to a table of topics proposed but not undertaken last year and a list of other suggested topics and asked the Committee to consider which of these they may wish to take forward.  It was noted that some would be more appropriately covered as report items to the full Committee.  It was also noted that workstreams should, wherever possible, look to achieve specific outcomes for the community.

Cllr Smith asked what the next steps now were for the workstreams that had been undertaken the previous year.

The Scrutiny Manager responded that reports were being finalised with recommendations and that it had been proposed to bring these reports to a meeting of the Committee on 30 July.  Recommendations would be circulated to workstream members.  Recommendations would be monitored to ensure they were being implemented.

The following workstreams and Cllr leads were AGREED:

School Places – Cllr Chibah

Standards and Attainment – Cllr Chibah

Adoption and Fostering – Cllr Fonyonga

Enforcement/Keep Enfield Clean – Cllr Laban

Land Planning – Cllr Smith

Integrated Care (health and adult social care) – Cllr Abdullahi

Sensory Impairment – Access to Services – Cllr Abdullahi

The following additional points were noted in respect of these workstreams:

Adoption and Fostering – this workstream would consider any potential ‘gaps’ in service and how to reduce the time taken to adopt/foster.

Enforcement – this workstream would include how to improve enforcement on private land and the Keep Enfield Clean initiative.

Land Planning – This workstream could look at the Meridian Water Masterplan and may also consider wider economic/business development issues.

It was then AGREED that the following workstreams be prioritised in the Work Programme:

·         School Places;

·         Enforcement/Keep  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

To receive the Minutes of the Meetings held on 1 and 8 April 2015.

The Minutes of the meetings held on 1 and 8 April were AGREED.

Cllr Smith referred to information requested by the Committee that remained outstanding from the meetings of 1 and 8 April and asked that this be followed up as a matter of priority ACTION: Scrutiny Manager.

To note the dates of future meetings as follows:

Provisional Call-Ins

Tuesday 16 June

Thursday 16 July

Thursday 30 July

Thursday 13 August

Tuesday 25 August

Please note, the next business meeting of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee will be held on Wednesday 2 September 2015.

The dates of future meetings were NOTED.

It was AGREED that a meeting would be held on the provisional date of 30 July to receive the finalised workstream reports for 2014/15.

It was also NOTED that the provisional date of 16 July could be utilised for a scoping meeting if required.

To consider, if necessary, passing a resolution under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 excluding the press and public from the meeting for the item of business listed in Part 2 of the agenda on the grounds that it will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in those paragraphs of Part 1 Schedule 12A to the Act (as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006), as are listed on the agenda (Please note there is a Part 2 agenda).

Appendices 1 and 4 as referred to in the Parks Locking Report at Item 4 of the Agenda.

See Item 19.