Agenda and minutes

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

It was noted that Councillor Toby Simon was substituting for Councillor Katherine Chibah and Councillor Elaine Hayward was substituting for Joanne Laban. Councillor Laban was leading on the call-ins for the Green Bin Service Change and the Development of Edmonton Cemetery.

Councillor Levy invited Ray James (Director HH&ASC),   to give a brief statement in respect of item 5 on the agenda: Call –In of Report: Refurbishment & Reprovision Work Of Enfield Highway Library Building. (Please see under item 5.)

It was noted that agenda item 4: Call- In of Report: The Development of Edmonton Cemetery would be discussed before agenda item 3: Call-In of Report: Green Bin Service Change.

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

Councillor Laban stated that in respect of agenda item 4, the ashes of her Grandparents were interred at Edmonton Cemetery. There were no other declarations of interests 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: 104)

Decision by Cabinet (19 October 2016): Green Bin Service Change.

Cabinet Decision included on Publication of Decision List No: 34/16-17 Key Decision KD4376 (List Ref: 10/34/16-17) issued on Friday 21 October 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 Members responsible for taking the decision.

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

The Chair invited Councillor Laban to present the reasons for Call-in.

Councillor Laban said the decision was for a service change that would affect virtually all residents in the borough. She summarised the reasons for Call-In as follows:

• The results of the consultation exercise showed that less than 1% of the Borough’s population had responded.
• Of those that had responded, the report stated that the majority preferred the proposed free fortnightly green bin collection, option.  It also stated that not many other suggestions were put forward by residents in response to the questionnaire.  However, the survey did not lend itself to other options being put forward for other service alternatives.
• The decision does not include a proposal for introducing a seasonal service which many local authorities have.
• Additional savings could be found from reducing contamination of bins.
• For those people who currently have slim- line green bins, they have been given an opportunity to change them for the larger bins however, the period when they can swap the bins is too far away from the proposed change over from weekly to fortnightly collections. Therefore, many people may not realise that they need to arrange for this bin change to be done.  This is especially so because more people do gardening in the summer months and the need for a bigger bin may not be apparent to them until after the free change- over period has expired.
• That if bins are much heavier as a result of a fortnightly collection then loads may be rejected, she questioned whether this situation had been scheduled into our service delivery

Councillor Laban requested that the decision be referred back to Cabinet for reconsideration of the available options.

The Chair invited Councillor Anderson to respond, which is summarised as follows:

• This consultation had one of the highest response rates received, which gave a good cross representation of all types/ demographics for the borough. The response was actually 3½% rather than 1% because that was the percentage of households who responded. Of those that responded to the consultation 87% rejected a charged for service.
• It is necessary for the council to make savings. The green bin service is non-statutory. Only 18% of English local authorities still operate a free weekly collection of green waste, other local authorities are also changing/ reducing the service provided.
• The busiest time for green bin usage is in May and therefore people should be aware of the bin swap opportunity.
• There will be an extensive communications programme to inform residents of the change of service in the run-up to the changes coming into effect.
• We are working hard to address the issue of contamination of bins.
• If green bins are particularly heavy this would usually be as a result of rubble or soil being put in the bins rather than green waste.
• The suggestion of making seasonal changes to the green bin collection service would not make the significant savings that are necessary. There were no other themes/ suggestions put forward  ...  view the full minutes text for item 232.

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 102).

Decision by Cabinet (19 October 2016) in respect of The Development of Edmonton Cemetery.

Cabinet Decision included on Publication of Decision List No: 34/16-17 Key Decision KD4234 (List Ref: 8/34/16-17) issued on Friday 21 October 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 Members responsible for taking the decision.

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

The Chair invited Councillor Laban to present the reasons for Call-In.

Councillor Laban said there has been a long time desire to expand the cemetery and there had been various press reports.  She highlighted the key issues as follows:

• This decision would mean that 10 of the 14 current tennis courts at the   location (by the A10), would be removed. This would mean the removal of free sports facilities for the borough.
• At the last meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee concerns were raised regarding the general health of the public and the high obesity rates in Enfield especially for children.  This is particularly so in poorer areas, and Edmonton is one of the poorest constituencies in London.  The proposal goes against the ‘Move More’ Enfield campaign. 
• Although the report refers to a sum of £250,000 being invested into the development of the remaining courts and other tennis sites in Enfield, this is not a vast sum of money and it will mean people will have to go a further distance to reach other tennis courts.  The current condition of the courts,  at this location are in a poor state of repair especially compared to others in the borough. Councillor Laban questioned whether this was intentional.
• The Council is borrowing at unprecedented levels and the decision includes capital investment, which would mean interest charges would need to be paid.
• The study to measure usage of the tennis courts was taken in May and early June, however the busiest time that tennis courts are used is during the Wimbledon tournament period.
• Although reference was made in the report to one of the reasons the tennis courts not being used more was due to their location near to the A10, this is contrary to a recent decision made for an artificial football pitch at Enfield Playing Fields adjacent to the A10.
• If the tennis courts were not being used then the Public Health team and Leisure teams should have questioned why this was the case.
• The Council is looking at borrowing high levels of funding and the decision does not explore the longer term idea of looking for cemetery space outside of the borough which may be a cheaper option for the future. She referred to the use of Trent Park cemetery for LB Islington.
• Demand levels may change in the future as demographics and people’s choices change.
• We will be losing 10 tennis courts for some of our poorer people.
• The decision has not looked at enough alternatives.
• There has been no consultation with residents

Councillor Laban requested that the decision be referred back to Cabinet for reconsideration of the available options.

The Chair invited Councillor Fonyonga (Cabinet Member for Community Safety & Public Health) and Councillor Anderson (Cabinet Member for Environment) to respond.  Their comments are given as follows:

Councillor Fonyonga -

• Councillor Fonyonga said she agreed with Councillor Laban that at the last business meeting of Overview and Scrutiny, obesity was raised as an area of concern and especially  ...  view the full minutes text for item 233.

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:110 )

Decision by Cabinet (19 October 2016): Refurbishment & Reprovision Work of Enfield Highway Library Building

Cabinet Decision included on Publication of Decision List No: 34/16-17 Key Decision KD4335  (List Ref:12/34/16-17) issued on Friday 21 October 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 Members responsible for taking the decision.

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

PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS ALSO A PART 2 REPORT RELATING TO THIS ITEM.

At the beginning of the meeting Ray James, Director HH&ASC, gave a statement that officers were recommending the referral of the decision back to Cabinet.  In light of this, Councillor Dogan Delman who had called in the decision had left a message that he was happy the matter was now being referred back to Cabinet. As this was the outcome that he had sought, he accepted that there was no need for a debate on this item and he would therefore not be attending Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting this evening.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS AGENDA ITEM HAS NOW BEEN WITHDRAWN

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:97 )

Decision by Cabinet (19 October 2016): Quarterly Corporate Performance Report

Cabinet Decision included on Publication of Decision List No: 34/16-17 Key Decision KD4330 (List Ref:3/34/16-17) issued on Friday 21 October 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 Members responsible for taking the decision.

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

It was noted that the procedure for call-in relates to decisions made by the Cabinet or a sub-committee of the Cabinet, an individual Cabinet member, or a key decision made by an officer.  As this report was one for Cabinet to note at its meeting of the 19 October 2016, rather than a decision taken, it was decided that this subject – ‘Corporate Performance report ‘–  be discussed at a future business meeting of Overview and Scrutiny. This should follow the publication of the second quarter of performance data. 

The Chair clarified that reports considered by Cabinet ‘for noting’ do not  prevent or restrict Scrutiny from looking at the issue through it’s normal business meetings or through a one-off specially called meeting. The Governance and Scrutiny Manager would send an email to members of Overview and Scrutiny explaining this further.  ACTION – Claire Johnson

To agree the Minutes of the meeting held on 11 October 2016.

AGREED the minutes of the meeting held on 11 October 2016 as a correct record.

To note the dates of future meetings as follows:

The date of the next business meeting of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee is to be confirmed

Provisional Call-Ins

Tuesday 22 November 2016

Tuesday 13 December 2016

Tuesday 17 January 2017

Business meetings of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee will be held on -

Thursday 19 January 2017

Thursday 23 February 2017

Noted the dates of future meetings and provisional call-in dates.

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 not a Part 2 agenda).

Attached for consideration as part of the call-in on this item, is the Part 2 Cabinet report considered as part of the decision made by Cabinet on 19 October 2016

The report should be read in conjunction with the Cabinet report attached at Appendix 1 to the Call-In report on the Part 1 agenda.

(This document contains exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)) of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 as amended).