Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed all attendees to the meeting.  Apologies for absence were received from Mr Simon Goulden.

It was noted that Councillor Dogan Delman was substituting for Councillor Joanne Laban.  

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

No declarations of interests were put forward.

To receive a report from the Director of Finance, Resources & Customer

Services outlining a Call-In received for consideration by Overview & Scrutiny

on the following reason: (Report No: 78).

Portfolio decision by Cabinet Member for Environment (18 August 2016): Approval of Cycle Enfield Proposals for the A105.

Decision included on Publication of Decision List No: 20/16-17 Key Decision

4342 (List Ref: 4/20/16-17) issued on 18 August 2016.

It is proposed that consideration of the Call-In be structured as follows:

·         Brief outline of reasons for the Call-In by representative(s) of the Members who have called in the decision.

·         Response to the reasons provided for the Call-In by the Cabinet Member responsible for taking the decision.

·         Debate by Overview & Scrutiny Committee and agreement on action to be taken.

The Chair invited Councillor Neville to present the Reasons for Call-In.  Councillor Neville began his submission by referring to the need for Members to act impartially, as this meeting should proceed without the ‘party whip’. Councillor Levy confirmed that all matters at Overview and Scrutiny are considered in this manner.

Councillor Neville stated that the Call-in was about the consultation undertaken in respect of the Cycle Enfield proposals for the A105, including consideration of the consultation findings and the adequacy of this.

He summarised the reasons for Call- In as follows:

• The leading law case which gives the criteria for a fair local authority consultation refers to two legal principles that are relevant here i.e. that ‘adequate time must be given for consideration and response’ and ‘the product of consultation must be conscientiously taken into account’  He did not think adequate time had been given for consideration as the consultation ended on 29 July 2016 with 1600 objections received, and the decision by the Cabinet Member to approve the scheme was signed by him on 17 August 2016.
• An objection had originally been given by Arriva Bus Company to the proposals, in particular the withdrawal of the bus lane going south from the Triangle, Palmers Green towards the North Circular Road and the impact/ delays of this on bus journeys.  Although the report refers to there being extensive discussion with TfL re a commitment to identify measures elsewhere on the route (mainly in Haringey) to mitigate this impact, we do not know what has been agreed with them.  He understands that even following recent meetings with officers, the Commercial Planning Manager of Arriva London (Bob Pennyfather) still has concerns about this scheme.
•  Reference was made to the Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) England and Wales Regulations 1996, that if an objection is made by a bus company to something that would restrict the movement of buses along the route, then the local authority is required to hold a Public Local Inquiry.  The objection from the bus company is not included in the schedule of objections received and the report does not state that the objections from Arriva have been withdrawn. As such a Local Inquiry is still required.  Under the same regulations there is a requirement to hold a public enquiry if an order is made prohibiting the loading or unloading of vehicles.
•  The air quality report acknowledged that there was likely to be some increase in NO² concentrations at junctions where there were some increases in queue length and delay time although with potential improvements if there was a modal shift from private car to cycling. However the report acknowledges that the shift from cars to cycles is not guaranteed and it is possible that the resulting air quality improvements may not be achieved.
• The London Ambulance Service (LAS) has set out serious reservations they have about the proposals. It appears that all three emergency services would be affected detrimentally by the scheme.
• The numerous objections received cannot  ...  view the full minutes text for item 131.

To receive reports on the following:

4.1     Children in Need, Child Protection & Looked After Children in Enfield 2015/16

To receive a report from Julian Edwards, Interim Assistant Director, Children’s Social Care

4.2     Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) Annual Report 2015/16 &  Safeguarding & Quality Assurance Service Independent Review Officer (IRO) Annual report 2015/16

To receive reports from Ann Stoker, Head of Safeguarding, Quality & Principal Social Worker, Schools & Children’s Services

Julian Edwards, the Interim AD Children’s Social Care introduced this report to update the Overview and Scrutiny Committee about workload/ activity levels and trends for the service. It gave information about levels of activity locally for children defined as being ‘in need’.  This includes children for who the local authority has had to initiate child protection processes and children who are in the care of the Council. 

He highlighted the following:

• There has been a significant change in the size and nature of Enfield’s population over the last few years with an increase in child population and an increase in the number of children who are living in poverty. Data shows Enfield is the 5^th most deprived borough in London and Enfield has the largest number of children living in poverty of all London boroughs.
• There has been an increase in referrals to Enfield’s Children’s social care services with a 50% increase over the last 3 years.
• The main factors that have led to an increase in referrals are believed to be - demographic, child sexual exploitation, FGM (female genital mutilation) and greater awareness of domestic violence.
• The numbers of children subject to Child Protection Plans has varied during the last year with approximately 200 currently in effect.
• The number of children adopted during 2015/16 is slightly less than in previous years
• The percentage of Enfield’s LAC children with a diagnosed disability is approximately the same as previous years.
• There have been 7 unaccompanied adolescent asylum seekers in Enfield of whom 4 were dispersed to other boroughs and 3 have stayed with us.

The following points/ questions were raised:

• It was confirmed that none of the 7 unaccompanied adolescent asylum seekers had come from Syria.
• When asked how adolescent asylum seekers come to Enfield it was confirmed that there is no particular reason why this happens. Some boroughs have larger numbers than others such as the higher numbers in Kent, Croydon, and Hounslow. A large number of adolescents are Albanians they also come from countries such as Afghanistan and Eritrea.  When children arrive in Enfield we have a duty to look after them.
• It was pointed out that only a small minority of Enfield’s LAC (Looked after Children) are in residential care, there would always be a few in residential care as a result of the Court system.  The aim would always be for children to move out of residential care as children benefit from being in a family situation.
• When asked about the impact of costs on the service Julian Edwards said foster care is much cheaper than paying for residential care, which can be very expensive i.e up to £5k a week. This is because specialist/ environment care may be necessary. 
• It was confirmed that when unaccompanied children arrive in the borough, the government provides a contribution towards the cost. For over 18’s there is no government contribution, although it may be necessary for some form of care to be provided. Local Authorities are lobbying the Government  ...  view the full minutes text for item 132.

To agree the Minutes of the meetings held on 30 June and 14 July 2016.

The Minutes of the meetings held on 30 June 2016 and 14 July 2016 were AGREED

Agenda Planning discussions for future meetings.

An OSC  Call-In meeting will be held on the 15 September 2016 on:

Education Services: A New Model of Service Delivery

To note the dates of future meetings as follows:

Call-In

Thursday 15 September 2016

Provisional Call-Ins

Thursday 29 September 2016

Wednesday 26 October 2016

Please note, the next business meetings of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee will be held on

Tuesday 11 October 2016

Thursday 10 November 2016

The dates of future meetings were NOTED

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).