Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

Councillor Backy Haggar declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 6 as it distantly related to matters involving Central North West London NHS Foundation Trust. She remained for the discussion of all items.

RESOLVED: That the minutes from the meeting on 30 July 2018 be confirmed as an accurate record.

It was confirmed that there were no Part II items and that all business would therefore be conducted in public.

Officers introduced the report and provided an overview. The report provided brief statistical information regarding households likely to be affected by the roll out of Universal Credit (UC) in the London Borough of Hillingdon and considered how UC works in practice and its likely impact. Key points raised included the fact that the main full service roll out of UC for new claimants in Hillingdon was scheduled for 24 October 2018, universal credit had been introduced in some parts of the Borough. The overall caseload would increase next year through the introduction of managed migration to transfer residents to universal credit.

Inderpal Mudhar, Partnership Manager, from the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) addressed the Committee and provided an overview of the process. He explained that there were two different claimant groups namely mainstream and vulnerable.

Mainstream claimant groups

Mainstream claimant groups had access to IT, they had access to email, bank accounts and phones for texting services. Once the claimant was set up they would call the service and arrange an appointment with their nearest Job Centre. Workers at the Job Centre would sit and check IDs. Workers discussed options such as what claimants were going to do, how claimants would look for jobs and relevant training needed and, following this, the claimant’s account would become active. If the claimant fell under the social housing category, the rent amount asked and the tenancy was verified with the Local Authority. There was also landlord portal which the DWP can access for information.

Vulnerable claimant groups

Mr Mudhar explained that vulnerable claimant groups usually had no access to IT and no knowledge of the digital process. Funds from the DWP had been commissioned to the Local Authority to support claimants. There were training providers that supported vulnerable claimant groups through the process and a training course usually took up to six weeks. If there were any arrears, personal budget services were discussed. Several job fairs were held, claimants had 1:1s, CV enhancement workshops and there were academies that provided work experience and training.

Mr Mudhar informed the Committee that one of the reasons that arrears occurred was due to the claimant already having arrears before UC was rolled out. The DWP wanted to support claimants with arrears and if there was evidence of hardship, advances were offered. The DWP worked closely with food banks. Overall, there were many options available to support claimants if the LA and DWP worked together.

Members thanked officers and Mr Mudhar for his attendance. Members welcomed the close working between the DWP and food banks to support vulnerable claimants.

In response to Member questions, Mr Mudhar confirmed that the DWP had a complex needs plan to manage vulnerable claimant groups. For example where there were alcohol/drug abuse concerns, the DWP worked with specialist organisations to support claimants. Specialist advisors worked with claimants with disabilities and employees were trained so that they could offer the appropriate support and options.  When asked how people were categorised as being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

Steve Ashley, Independent Chair of the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB) and Hillingdon’s Adult Safeguarding Board introduced the reports and provided an overview of the key points raised.

LSCB

It was highlighted that there would be significant changes to the local safeguarding childrens boards over the next year and new safeguarding structures and arrangements needed to be developed.  A new entity would be in place next year and work was already underway. Mr Ashley drew the Committee’s attention to the results of the OFSTED inspection which took place in April 2018, in which it was confirmed that Hillingdon was graded good with outstanding features in terms of leadership.

Members commented that this was an excellent report and children were being served well. There were clear improvements. Further information was requested in terms of the attendance of Members at various boards. It was confirmed that despite the structural changes, reports would still be provided to the POC although it was unknown how the report would look and what it would include.

Members questioned what called for the changes in the structural changes. Mr Ashley explained that following the incidents in Rotherham, it became clear throughout the investigations that there was a poor relationship between children and partnership working. Serious issues came to light which called for reviews into the LSCB’s function, and the Government found that it was no longer fit to purpose.  However, the structural changes provided a good and big opportunity for child safeguarding to be developed at a strategic level involving two major agencies namely the police and health services.

Officers highlighted the importance of improvements and being critical to ensure a high level of performance. Officers also congratulated everyone and acknowledged the work put in by the authority as a whole.

Following Member questions regarding the new police structure, Mr Ashley raised some concerns about the policing situation in the Borough. He explained that there was difficulties in securing attendance at meeting. There was only a limited amount of officers that looked after missing children and resources were spread across three different boroughs which made it difficult.

SAB

Mr Ashley explained that this a year a joint LSCB and SAB conference was held in partnership with the CCG to highlight the importance of early recognition of the signs of Sepsis. The SAB had a proactive action plan for the coming year. The priorities included modern slavery, domestic abuse, adult grooming/financial abuse and audit of current training. Progress on the action plan would be reported at each board meeting.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee:

1)    Noted the annual reports; and

2)    Delegated to the Chairman and Labour Lead to agree comments to be included within the two safeguarding reports for when they are presented to the Cabinet.

This item was deferred prior to the meeting. This item will be heard at the meeting on 17 October 2018.

Councillor Eginton raised two matters in compliance with Committee Standing Order 18 in the Council’s Constitution. He proposed for two matters namely Corporate Parenting and Major Housing Works to be included in the Committee’s work programme for 2018/19.

In summary, he explained that with the changes implemented by Council in May 2018, the corporate parenting panel was abolished and as a result there was a reduced level of oversight and accountability for the function. Councillors had a responsibility to look after the 300 children in care and there would not be a corporate parenting item on the work programme until next year where there would be a presentation from children in care. He asked Members to take advantage of the creating a sub group or panel. The second matter had been raised as a result landlords issuing section 20 notices and not providing enough notice to tenants. Councillor Eginton questioned how many Members were aware of the pledges that the Council had provided to children.

The Chairman explained that since the first meeting, she had been working closely with officers to ensure that any panel/sub groups would be established properly. This included having the right people on the groups defining the terms of reference and looking at ways to get the children more involved. Officers and Members were still protecting children.

Members commented that the new structure needed to be embedded and that previous sub group had been unduly onerous on officers. Members commented that this was motion was too early.

The Chairman stated that it was incorrect to say that there was no oversight of children in care, as work was being done to ensure that work was being done properly. The Chairman suggested that children may be involved even more in engaged in the process then before. This was supported by Members who highlighted that evidence before the Committee showed that there had been improvements made during the last six years.

When put to a vote, the majority voted against adding the two proposed items to the work programme at this time, with Councillor Eginton and Councillor Gardner voting in favour.

RESOLVED: That the Committee considered the two matters raised and decided not to include them in the Committee’s work programme at this early stage.

RESOLVED: That the Cabinet Forward Plan be noted.

It was noted that Members were asked to bear in mind the terms of reference of the major review to focus on how the changes could be embedded by the Council and support its residents. The purpose of the review was not to scrutinise policies already agreed by Government.

Members also noted the comments made by Steve Ashley, Independent Chairman for the Hillingdon Local Safeguarding Children Board ( HLSCB) AND the Safeguarding Adult Board in relation to the new police structure in the Borough. Members asked for the comments to be fedback to relevant officers.

RESOLVED: That the work programme be noted.