Professor Chris Whitty et al: Sewage in water: a growing public health problem

It is not often I publish government press releases but this one LINK has not had much publcity. It is important in the light of the recent pollution of Wealdstone Brook and attempts to get local public health officers and their councils to sit up and take notice.. 

A joint opinion piece from Professor Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer for England, Jonson Cox, Ofwat chair and Emma Howard Boyd, Environment Agency chair

 

One of the greatest public health triumphs of the last 200 years was separating human faeces from drinking water. People now take this for granted but it was the basis for preventing cholera, typhoid and other bacterial and viral diarrhoeal diseases that killed millions in major epidemics. Largely achieved through remarkable feats of engineering over 2 centuries, only vaccination matches it as a public health intervention for preventing infectious diseases. When bacteria from human faeces (coliforms) are ingested, it increases the risk of significant infections including antibiotic resistant bacteria. Keeping human faeces out of water people might ingest remains a public health priority.

 

Tap water in the UK is safe. No-one expects river water to be of drinking standard, but where people swim or children play they should not expect significant doses of human coliforms if they ingest water. Raw sewage from storm overflows and continuous discharge of waste containing viable organisms from sewage treatment works is an increasing problem. This is a serious public health issue for government and regulators and it is clear that the water companies are not doing enough. The public health dangers are in addition to the ecological and environmental impact which forms the basis for much regulation.

 

Use of our rivers for recreation and exercise is something to celebrate and encourage. Children have always played in waterways and always will, irrespective of what notices are put up next to them. People of all ages use freshwater waterways such as rivers for recreation including swimming and various forms of boating. During lockdown many people took to swimming in rivers and have continued since. Our rivers, seas and waterways should therefore be free from sewage to reduce risk to the public. There are 2 major issues to tackle. Both have solutions.

 

The first is raw sewage discharge from the sewage network and in particular storm overflows. As the name implies this should be exceptionally rare. The engineering logic of storm overflows is that if the sewerage system is at risk of being overwhelmed by storms or atypically intense rain, sewers get too full and can back up into homes or overflow into streets. To prevent that, storm overflows act as a safety release valve, but were intended only for exceptional circumstances when the public would be unlikely to be using rivers.

 

After the Environment Agency required the water industry to install monitors on overflows, data shows that their use is now not exceptional. In some cases, up to 200 discharges a year are occurring. This is obviously unacceptable on public health grounds. Whilst zero discharges are technically achievable the cost of this may not be justified; to reduce the frequency down to genuine storms should however be a minimum expectation. It certainly is the expectation of the great majority of the public, including those who do not themselves use rivers recreationally as measured by polling data. Nobody wants a child to ingest human faeces.

 

There are solutions to getting storm overflows back to only functioning only in very high rainfall conditions. These involve better operational management, innovation and investment. This is rightly seen as the job of water companies. As a start, 4 have recently agreed to reduce their overflows to an average of no more than 20 discharges a year by 2025 – but we need to go much further and Ofwat and the Environment Agency will hold companies to account for this delivery.

 

The second major issue is coliforms from the continuous normal discharge from sewage works. Whilst raw sewage is not discharged into waterways from these, viable bacteria and viruses are, as part of normal operations. Eliminating discharges of coliforms from sewage works upstream of popular recreational areas will go a long way to reducing human faecal infective organisms downstream. This has been achieved for seaside beaches at coastal works by use of ultraviolet treatment. Other forms of less energy-intensive treatment are in trial or development: these options need to be pushed forward by companies with urgency.

 

It will inevitably require investment to boost resilience and capacity in our sewerage system. But it is not just a question of money – it needs preventive engineering, better sewer management, innovation and commitment. We welcome recent initiatives by some companies, but a lot more needs to be done. Ofwat asked all companies to produce an action plan setting out how they will rapidly improve river health. As they finalise plans, they must demonstrate a commitment to public health that matches public expectation. We have 2 stretches of river in England and Wales with bathing water status. There are over 500 in France.

 

We recognise management of sewers is made more difficult by plastic wet wipes flushed down toilets which congeal together with fats poured down drains to form fatbergs that block sewers and cause avoidable use of the storm overflows. Ensuring all of us put wet wipes in bins or, better, that only rapidly biodegradable wet wipes are available would immediately assist in reducing avoidable outflow problems.

 

However, the principal public health responsibility for ensuring human faeces and viable human faecal bacteria do not get into waterways people might use recreationally, rest squarely with the water companies and their directors. Ministers have already signalled they want significant action, requiring companies to deliver a multi-billion pound programme to tackle storm sewage discharges. Companies should take the initiative and go faster. Regulators will hold companies to account. 

 

It is time for wastewater companies to act. It will be a matter of choice if they do not.

• Professor Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer for England
• Jonson Cox, Chair, Ofwat
• Emma Howard Boyd, Chair, Environment Agency

 

Contribute to the consultation on Brent's Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy - a vital tool in tackling the borough's health inequalities

Brent Health and Wellbeing Board will discuss updated reports on winter planning as services cope with the pandemic and the usual winter increases in cases LINK and the much longer term Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy LINK which is the result of learning lessons from the pandemic and entering the third stage of consultation.

The Strategy consultation ends on January 31st 2022 and the final document will go to the Board on March 16th 2022 for agreement.

Residents and organisations can complete the consultation HERE.

The Strategy seeks to address the following health inequality issues in a joined up way: (Click on images to enlarge)

Harrow Public Health chief issues warning as Covid rates increase more than 97% when last 7 days are compared with the previous 7

 

UK Health Security Agency Omicron cases in Brent amd Harrow as of December 13th

 

 FROM harrow.gov.uk

The Head of the UK Health Security Agency has called the Omicron variant “probably the most significant threat” since the start of the pandemic.

• Omicron is serious and spreading fast
• Vaccination is the best defence  - get your booster jab
• Hands, Face, Space and Ventilate remain vital
• Think carefully about Christmas plans

Omicron and Christmas by Carole Furlong, Harrow Director of Public Health

Though we're all very tired of Covid and hoping to see people this Christmas, we must take this new threat very seriously. Omicron is far more transmissible than anything we’ve seen before. 

More than 77,000 new cases were recorded in the UK yesterday, 16th December – the biggest increase in a single day. This record though is set to be broken repeatedly in the coming days and weeks, with the number of Covid cases nationwide currently doubling every couple of days. This level of infection and the potential absences from workplaces could have serious implications for the running of services.

The data for Harrow shows a more than 97% increase in cases when the last 7 days are compared with the previous 7. As Harrow’s Director of Public Health I’m very concerned about this. 

London is once again on the frontline. One of the things that makes the capital more vulnerable is the relatively low levels of vaccination. Across the UK more than 81% of the population have had their first two doses of vaccine. In London that drops to 61%, and in Harrow it’s 64%. 

That leaves a significant proportion of our community less protected and we will continue to encourage people to come forward for their first, second and booster jabs. On our YouTube channel you’ll find a number of videos from local health professionals and members of the public talking about the benefits of Covid vaccination. Most compelling are those that were unsure about vaccination but are now advocates for it. 

Omicron is very new and is still little understood. Early reports that it is less serious than other strains should be treated with caution. These ideas have been drawn from study of Omicron’s area of origin in southern Africa, where the population is much younger.

What we do know is that Omicron is very highly infectious. Vaccination is our most effective tool, but we must use it alongside simple precautions like handwashing, wearing of face coverings and social distancing. 

We all know by now the steps we can take to limit the spread of infection and while we don’t expect that there will be any formal lockdown type restrictions imposed in England before Christmas, I’m appealing to everyone to do all you can to protect yourself and your family and slow the spread of this dangerous new variant. 

Face coverings are now mandatory in most indoor settings and a newly introduced Covid pass, confirming vaccination status or a recent negative test, is now required for entry to large gatherings, such as concerts.

I agree with Dr Chris Whitty, England’s Chief Medical Officer, who recommends we carefully consider our planned social contact this festive period and prioritise the important occasions, or otherwise risk contracting Covid and being unable to meet those people we care about most. 

The implication of this advice is that a significant proportion of the population is expected to contract Omicron, as it becomes the dominant variant in the UK.

Before you mix with other people, get a negative lateral flow test and encourage others to do the same. If you’re indoors, think about ventilation. Most Covid transmission occurs through the air. Keeping the air circulating is an effective way to reduce potential build up of virus and limit its opportunities to spread.

Vaccination 

Our best defence against Omicron is vaccination. Vaccines both protect the person receiving them – they are less likely to be seriously ill if they contract the virus – but also reduces the risk of them passing it on to others. Omicron’s remarkable transmissibility pits us in a race against time – vaccinating on a huge scale at the same time as Omicron is moving through the population at such worrying speed. 

Eligibility for booster jabs has now been extended to include anyone aged 18 and over. 
We've been working closely with the NHS to help meet the huge demand for jabs that has been created. Together we're opening a number of vaccination clinics offering booster jabs and, for those that still need them, first and second doses.

If you had your second jab at least three months ago, you can book your booster now. Appointments are being added all the time to the national booking system. 

Walk in appointments are available over the weekend and Monday at Civic 5, the building to the right of the main Civic Centre. We’re ramping up capacity in this clinic, which can also be booked through the national system, and hope it will soon operate 7 days a week.

If you’re coming to this clinic without a booked appointment, please arrive between 9am and 6pm, be prepared for a long wait outdoors and plan accordingly. Walk in appointments are also available at some local pharmacies. See further information about these and other vaccine centres across North West London. There are also special pop-up sessions at Chelsea FC on Saturday and Wembley stadium on Sunday.

Testing – without symptoms

Please use lateral flow tests regularly and before mixing with others. Many people can have Covid and not show any symptoms and even though they feel fine, are still able to infect others. Testing regularly helps to find these hidden cases and break the chain of infection.

If you are a contact of someone with Covid-19, the NHS Test and Trace Team will inform you, and decide if you need to isolate. This decision will depend on several factors but critically you do not need to isolate if you are fully vaccinated, instead you will be asked to undertake daily lateral flow tests. Please note if you are told to isolate it is a legal requirement.

After some disruption, the online ordering of test kits is working again. We understand some local pharmacies are running low on stock. 16 pharmacies in Harrow offer assisted testing, where your test is processed for you onsite, and this service is still working well.

Testing – with symptoms

If you have symptoms of Covid – a fever, continuous cough or a change in your sense of taste or smell – you must stay at home and not have visitors and get a PCR test as soon as possible. 

Self-isolation is the most effective way of limiting your contact with others and minimising Covid’s opportunities to infect more people. We’ve been working with the NHS to help increase the number of PCR tests that can be offered in Harrow. The mobile testing unit outside the Civic Centre is now open 7 days a week and will operate throughout the Christmas break.
 

New Test & Trace site to open in London Road, Wembley

Will Covid19 restrictions disrupt Brent Biennial?

A further 4,322 coronavirus cases and 27 deaths have been reported in the UK, according to the government's daily figures.

This is the highest number of cases reported since 8 May, when there were 4,649 cases. The government is considering what measures should be taken nation-wide.

I understand there is local concern about the rising number of cases in Brent with figures said to be above 20 per 100,000. Government action occurs when figures reach 30-50 per 100,000 but there is discussion about whether Brent Council Public Health should pre-empt such action. 

Certainly, I was concerned when earlier this week I saw crowds of school students outside Ark Academy at dismissal time with little social distancing and few face coverings. They mixed with the general public at the Wembley Park Station bus stops.

Unfortunately, this concern coincides with the Brent Biennial which kicks off tomorrow as part of the ill-fated 2020 London Borough of Culture programme. I understand that the opening of local libraries for 4 hours on Saturday and Sundays until December had been planned.  Brent Council might be encouraging people to attend a number of events when they are at the same time considering possible restrictions.

'Not a penny more to Serco' - Give Track & Trace cash to local public health

On the day the government decided to restructure Public Health England, in the middle of a pandemic with a new wave expected in the Autumn ,Brent Trades Council demonstrated against plans to give 'Track and Trace' cash to Serco rather than local councils' public health departments.

FULL STORY

Demonstration Tuesday Brent Civic Centre Noon: No more 'Track & Trace' cash for SERCO - give it to Brent Public Health instead

From We Own It and Brent Trades Council

Matt Hancock needs to scrap Serco and Sitel’s failed contracts now instead of renewing them on August 23rd.


The government must give the £528 million allocated for these contract extension to local authorities and Public Health England teams instead. Privatised track and trace has been a disaster that is costing lives.

It’s time to put local public health teams in charge of the whole system. They have the tools and the local knowledge they need to do this vital work before any second wave this winter. Now they need the money.
 

Join us tomorrow, Tuesday 18th August 12 noon, outside Brent Civic Centre for a demonstration in support of a local Test and Trace system, run by the Brent Council Public Health department. Social distancing and please wear a mask.

Brent Council: No evidence of rise in Covid19 cases in the borough & no plans for a lockdown

Wembley High Road (Credit: Amanda Rose)

Brent Council, on  a post on its website, has sought to reassure residents in the face of reports that the borough is facing a lockdown after events in Leicester:

You may have seen news reports that Brent could shortly be put into a local lockdown. The situation is constantly monitored, but public health data does not suggest that cases are rising in the borough and there are currently no plans for a local lockdown.

However, it remains important to follow the latest government guidelines. Please keep your distance and get tested if you display symptoms.


Professor Kevin Fenton, London Regional Director for Public Health England, also commented on the reports, saying that:

The number of new cases of coronavirus is under close, active surveillance across the country and small fluctuations day by day are to be expected.

The increases in some boroughs that have been reported are mainly sporadic and are being uncovered as we scale up testing and contact tracing activity across the city.

Importantly, the overall levels of coronavirus in London remain low and steady. We’re working closely with all local authorities to prepare for and manage any potential local clusters and outbreaks and our epidemiological analysis will play an important role identifying if there is a significant sustained increase in the community.

As we carefully emerge from lockdown, it is important now more than ever that Londoners continue to follow government advice on social distancing, self-isolation, wearing face coverings, and practicing good hand hygiene, in order to keep the number of new cases in London on its way down. If you have a new continuous cough, a high temperature or a loss of, or change to your sense of smell or taste, stay at home and arrange a test immediately.

Brent proposes to combine Health Visitor and School Nurse services

A paper going to Cabinet on Monday proposes the procurement of a new 'joined up' 0-19 Health Visitor and School Nursing Service with a combined value of £6.6m.

Currently the Health Visitor and Family Nurse Service is provided by London North West Healthcare Trust and School Nursing by Central London NW Healthcare Trust.

There have been concerns, some of which I voiced in a delegation to Cabinet, about the lack of continuity between health visiting and school nursing, at the point where children start nursery. Early Years practitioners have found children arrive at nursery or reception with specific special needs that they haven't been informed about in advance.

One of the issues has been that engagement with health visitor services is not mandatory and that missed appointments are not followed up. Health Visitors are often the first people to become aware of a family's other needs. The paper LINK states: 

...The successful Provider will be required to demonstrate how their services and the staff teams employed will be pro-active and engage with families and their under 5s to support health needs and link into wider issues including housing, education, childcare, welfare and poverty. 

The service to be procured as outlined in this report will lead to the delivery of the Healthy Child Programme - the early intervention and prevention public health programme issued by the Department of Health which lies at the heart of universal services for children and their families. The early years are a crucial stage of life, and this service will provide an invaluable opportunity to identify families who are in need of additional support and children who are at risk of poor outcomes. 


To improve continuity across the services and age ranges, the Council is planning to combine health visiting and school nursing service so that professionals will be able to continue to work with the same children for a longer period of time rather than passing them to another service as they get 
older. This will improve the continuity for children and young people and their families. 

By commissioning these services together professionals will no longer be bound by the traditional age ranges of services, and both children and families can benefit by receiving support from the same professional for longer. It will also be expected to realise efficiencies through economies of scale and overhead and management costs. 

 The 'efficiencies' referred to in the last sentence are clearly something to scrutinise in the context of the impact of cuts on services but the joined up approach is something to be welcomed. The health of Under 5s was a matter of great concern in a report to Cabinet in January this year LINK.

There are an estimated 24,600 under 5s in Brent, an increase of 2,500 on 2010, but the rate of increase is expected to slow over the next few years. The resident population of 0-19 year olds is expected to increase by almost 10% over the next 5 years.

The new combined contract would start on April 1st 2017.

Brent admits single Scrutiny Committee failures and proposes a change to two committee system

Less than two years after the adoption of the controversial decision to have just one Scrutiny Committee in Brent proposals are to go before the Cabinet to have two Scrutiny Committees. If adopted this would go to the May Council AGM.

The proposal outlines the issues that have arisen from the single committee structure, some of which were forecats by a guest blog on Wembley Matters in May 2014 LINK:

.        The purpose of moving to a single Scrutiny Committee meeting on a frequent basis was to enable a more consistent, holistic and streamlined approach to all scrutiny activities commissioned by a single committee. The introduction of a single committee to replace the previous four themed scrutiny committees also made a considerable saving in terms of member allowances. Prior to May 2014 each scrutiny committee had a chair, vice-chair and six members with respective allowances. The annual potential cost of each committee was £38,020 in member allowances, making a total for the whole scrutiny function of potentially £152,080. The current cost of member allowances for a single scrutiny committee is potentially £36,190 making a potential saving of £115,890 on the previous model. These costings are maximum potential costs only as members already in receipt of a special responsibility allowance would not be entitled to a second special responsibility allowance for their scrutiny role. The costings nonetheless provide a useful illustration of the indicative costs implications. 


.        It was considered that operating separate scrutiny committees produced a fragmented approach to scrutiny with each committee developing its own work programme which did not always reflect the cross-cutting aspects of complex policy issues. It was also felt that a single committee would be a more effective use of the finite officer resources available to support scrutiny given the pressure on resources. 


.        However after nearly two years of operating the single Scrutiny Committee structure, the anticipated advantages have not outweighed the logistical issues of monthly meetings and has resulted in a concentration of scrutiny activities into a relatively small group of members and officers. 


.        Having one committee responsible for all scrutiny activities has meant that the committee has not developed in depth specialism and understanding of services or key policy agendas. With a wide variety of issues being considered at each meeting the agendas can be incoherent and this makes it difficult to develop continuity on specific subjects or issues between committee meetings. 


.         In particular the move away from themed committees has resulted in less active engagement of service areas in working constructively with scrutiny members as there is less perceived ownership of one corporate Scrutiny Committee. This has both distanced service departments from scrutiny and meant that less members overall are activity engaged in debate and discussion on the policy issues and performance of Council services. In practice the current model means that only eight members are actively engaged in scrutiny discussion on a regular basis (although other members who are not part of the formal scrutiny committee do contribute to task groups). Previously around 30 non–executive members regularly contributed to a scrutiny committee at least once a quarter. 


.        The single Scrutiny Committee model has also impacted on the development of a productive scrutiny relationship with statutory partners, particularly in relation to the duties of the Council to scrutinise the provision of local health services and partnership work on community safety. It has proved difficult to accommodate a consistent work programme on health issues, children’s services and adult social care within the single work programme. This has limited the development of an in depth understanding of these complex and critical service areas, which was noted in the findings of the recent Ofsted inspection of Brent’s Safeguarding and Looked After Children’s services. 


.        The disadvantage of a single Scrutiny Committee structure could not necessarily have been foreseen. Brent is still the only Council in London to operate a single scrutiny committee structure, although three others have a main committee with themed sub-committees. However as the Council enters the next phase of change with the development of the Brent 2020 Vision and the programme of outcome based reviews, it is vital that we reconsider the most appropriate scrutiny structure which will facilitate the effective engagement of members in shaping the future direction of the Council via the Scrutiny function. This is particularly important given the political composition of the Council and the challenging nature of the issues the borough faces. 


The report goes on to propose a two committee structure to remedy the situation after setting out the role of Scrutiny:

 

.        There are a number of key objectives which any new scrutiny structure should be designed to achieve. These are:-

·      To enable non-executive members to develop a thorough understanding of key policy and service issues which supports effective and constructive scrutiny of performance and decision-making across Council services and meets the statutory requirements of scrutiny. 


·      Maximises the number of Members engaged in regular scrutiny activities and enables non-executive members to contribute to the shaping of Council policy at the right point in the policy development process. 


·      A structure that covers both the breadth of internal and external issues but also provides sufficient scope for the committee to develop specialisation and become experts in their subject areas. 


·      The frequency of scrutiny meetings is aligned to the decision-making timetable and enables high quality reports to be produced with scrutiny input made at the right time in the development of options and proposals. 


·      Can take a holistic view of partnership, performance and resourcing issues in relation to the individual service or issue under scrutiny. 


·      Enables clear accountability of Lead members and senior officers for decisions and service performance. 


·      The scrutiny function should be responsive to the views and concerns of service users and residents, actively seeking their opinions to shape their work programme. 


·      Is properly resourced and supported by senior officers and services within the Council and the contribution of scrutiny members is a valued part in the process of defining the Council’s future policy direction. 


.        3.15  In order to achieve these objectives it is therefore proposed that the future Scrutiny committee structure should, as set out below, be more closely aligned to the organisational structure of the Council as well as providing more opportunity for in-depth scrutiny.

 
Proposed Scrutiny Structure 


The proposal is to have two scrutiny committees combining the following remits:- 


·      Community and Well being Scrutiny Committee 

This committee would cover Housing, Adult Social Care, Public Health and the statutory responsibilities with regard to scrutiny of local health services and major reconfigurations of provision. It would also scrutinise the children and young people’s service, partnership work undertaken by the Children’s Trust and scrutiny of Safeguarding arrangements. The committee would be composed of eight elected members (seven from the Labour Group and one opposition group member which is consistent with current political balance arrangements). The four voting education co-opted members and the two non voting education co-opted members would be part of this committee. 

·      Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee 

This committee would cover corporate resources, (including Customer Services, Policy, Partnerships and Performance, Procurement and IT) as well as regeneration, environment and community safety. The committee would be composed of eight elected members (seven from the Labour Group and one opposition group member which is consistent with current political balance arrangements). 

The indicative cost implications in respect of special responsibility allowances are set out below. As previously stated, however, these costings are potential maximum costs only and actual costs are likely to be lower as some of the members will already be in receipt of a special responsibility allowance. 
In addition, in accordance with the provisions of the Members’ Allowance Scheme, a 1% uplift in allowances has been factored in. On this basis the total potential costs are £40,614 higher than the current scrutiny structure. 


2 x Chairs allowance at £14,140
2 x Vice Chairs at £5,050
12 x SRA allowance for committee members at £3,202

Total

£28,280 £10,100 £38,424

£76,804

  

The full report can be found HERE

'Prudent' Brent budget still has some risks of under delivery including Public Health and Youth Service

The Chief Finance Officer's Assessment of Brent Council's proposed budget asserts that it contains the right mixture of risk and prudence. However he highlights some areas where the risk of under-delivery is more signifcant.

The full list of cuts and savings can be found HERE

In the extract below in italics is the Chief Finance Officer's statement and below an extract from the savings document,  I was particularly concerned about the proposals on Public Health (PH3) following the removal of the ring-fence, especially after the report to the Cabinet at their last meeting LINK  We need to know exactly what is being cut and what the impact is as well as what needs should be met that may not have been met hithertoo. Brent Council only took on responsibility for the Public Health of Under 5s a few months ago.

There were warnings last year about the deliverability of the changes in the Youth Service and this remains an issue.

Soem of the other proposals seem vague at best.

I am sorry about the problems with the formatting. There are often problems transferring text from PDFs on to this blog.

 

a.     Proposal CYP3, which requires savings of £0.9m from a complex reorganisation of youth services 


Reduce management and infrastructure costs in 2015/16, and establish a new delivery model by 2016. Savings of £100k include in 2015/16.

b.     Proposal R&G1,which requires a further reduction in TA costs of £0.5m in 2016/17 and a further £0.5m in 2017/18. This reflects the complex demographic and legislative pressures in this area. 


Savings of £1.3m were included for 2015/16 based on underspending in 2013/14 and reflecting the expectation that service demand would be less than anticipated in the original model . A  further £1.0m saving was included for 2016/17 and 2017/18

c.      R&G25f, which requires a surplus, over time, of £0.35m p.a. from the Lettings Agency, although none of this is budgeted for in 2016/17 


BHP will be establishing a lettings agency in 2014. The business plan projects completed additional surpluses of £350k per annum bein generated from year five (2018/19). The saving represents increased income from the provision property and tenancy management services to private sector properties

d.     ACE2, which plans to reduce the council’s contribution to the London Boroughs Grant Committee by £0.34m in 2017/18, which cannot be achieved without securing a two-thirds majority in London Councils

Review of grant funding to London Councils

The Council cannot withdraw from, or unilaterally reduce its funding to, the Grants Programme. On the contrary, s.48(7) Local Government Act 1985 provides that a grants scheme such as this one, once agreed by the majority of the London borough councils, may be binding upon a dissenting London Borough council in the absence of its agreement. We have explored the legislative scope for this. Section 48 of the Local Government Act 1985, which established the London Councils grant scheme, stipulates that councils can only vary their contribution to the grant scheme with the agreement of at least two thirds of London Boroughs. The time available to implement any agreed change would significantly limit the level of savings achieved in 2015/2016. The Council could start conversations now with leaders of other councils with a view to introducing a reduction in funding to London Councils at the end of this cycle of projects i.e. April 2017.

e.     HR1 & L&P1, which collectively require further savings of £1.6m in the council’s legal services and human resources department.

HR1It is proposed to carry out a major reconfiguration of the HR service in 2015/16 saving £1.4m by 2016/17. This will result in the merging of some areas in order to reduce the number of managers required in the new structure. It is the intention to devolve responsibility for some existing activities undertaken by the Learning and Development team to HR Managers. Other activities will be accommodated by a new performance team with a broader remit which will include resourcing, workforce development, policy and projects. In addition it is proposed to cap the existing trade union facilties time allocation awarded to GMB and Unison to a maximium of 1 x PO1 post per trade union, to move the occupational health service inhouse saving £60k and reduce the learning and development budget by £67k. In year 2016/17 further reductions in staffing can be potentially achieved through shared service arrangements within payroll, pensions, HR management information and recruitment. Savings of £696k included in 2015/16.

L&P1 Different options of service delivery – outsourcing – private legal firm / buying from local authority that sells legal services and also London Wide work of setting up a shared service. Proposal to enter a shared service for legal. Savings of £400k have been brought forward from future years to 2016/17. Savings of £458k included in 2015/16.

f.      PH3, where savings of £1m against the public health grant are required 


 

Agreed that efficiencies would be made within public health once the grant ceased to be ring fenced and further opportunities sought to use grant to deliver across Council functions

g.     R&G32,where  savings of £1.5m are required through implementation of 
the customer access strategy. 


Implementation of new customer access strategy with a specific aim to reduce the current costs of contact handling by migrating custome contact on line, improve the efficiencies of telephone handling arrangements and optimising use of shared data to reduce the nee for customers to have to contact multiple services with the same

information. There is a £1.5m of savings which will be achieved across the Council and held as a central saving in 2016/17