Brent scrutiny proposals elaborated

I have received further details of the way Scrutiny is intended to operate under the new Brent Council arrangements from a reliable source. They seem to go beyond what is actually in the papers going to Full Council on Wednesday.

There will be 8 members of the Scrutiny Committee withs its work programme co-ordinated by a single Chair. The Chair will be empowered to form sub-committees and task groups to examine particular policy areas and developments.

The Chair will be able to invite any member of the Council, apart from the Mayor and Deputy Mayor, and who are not in the Cabinet,  and 'notable citizens' outside the Council to sit on the sub-committees and task groups.

The seven other members of the Scrutiny Committee will serve as chairs of the sub-committees and task groups as well as contributing to the main Scrutiny Committee.

The claim is that this will give more members of the Council and the public an opportunity to get involved in scrutiny.

The Scrutiny committees will take place on a monthly basis rather than the present quarterly  meetings and the full committee will meet the week after Cabinet meetings.

I also understand that there are proposals for the creation of deputy cabinet positions so as to involve more of the large Labour group in policy making.

On the face of it this clarification (or is it a revision?), seems to go some way to addressing concerns about the lack of scrutiny in an 'almost one party' Council but  the proposals still look rather vague and the method of choosing committee members unclear. It will be the detail, and the people on the committee/s, that will have to convince the sceptics.

Brent Labour's new cabinet announced

The new Cabinet

A challenge to Cllr Muhammed Butt's leadership by Cllr Neil Nerva was beaten at today's Labour AGM when Butt won 75% of the votes.

Cllr Michael Pavey narrowly beat Cllr Ruth Moher for the Deputy Leadership. Pavey told Labour councillors that he would devote all his energy to supporting Cllr Butt's reforms, freeing the leader to 'lead from the front'. His precise brief in addition to being deputy has not been decided but a source said that he was likely to be a 'more political' deputy.

Cllr James Denselow beat Cllr Aslam Choudry  by three votes for the Stronger Communities portfolio. This will make him responsible for community and voluntary sector engagement, libraries  and crime reduction.

Cllr George Crane stood down from the Executive and Cllr Margaret McLennan will take on regeneration policy, Crane's former portfolio,  as well as housing.

Cllr Roxanne Mashari will take on a new portfolio for Employment and Skills  and newly elected Cllr Keith Perrin will become lead member for the Environment.

Cllr Krupesh Hirani will continue as lead member for Adults, Health and Wellbeing and Cllr Ruth Moher will take over Michael Pavey's position as Lead Member for the renamed Children and Young People portfolio.

The Cabinet will consist of 8 members compared with 10 on the previous Executive.

Cllr Pat Harrison continues as Labour Group chair and Cllr Sandra Kabir replaces Cllr Shafique Choudhary as Labour Chief Whip.

Cllr Kana Naheerathan will be Labour's nomination for Mayor and Cllr Lesley Jones deputy,

The proposal that the Labour leader should only face re-election every four years, instead of annually, will be decided later. It has proved controversial with Cllr Butt  apparently claiming that he cannot keep looking over his shoulder every year.

Chairs of Scrutiny, Planning and other committees will be decided on Monday.

More democracy 'wherever practicable' suggests new Labour councillor

As the Labour Group meets this morning there are signs of some disquiet over the changes in Scrutiny. However, concentrating minds even more in the context of concentrating power, is the proposed amendment to Labour Party Standing Orders which would abolish annual elections. This would leave Muhammed Butt in the leadership position until the next local election,

In a Twitter exchange with former councillor James Powney, newly elected councillor Tom Miller asks, "What stake for backbenchers, one might ask?'

Powney replied that it was open to the Labour Group to defer the decision.

Tom Miller responded, 'One for closed doors I am sure, but I know which way I fall on democracy issues - more of it whenever practicable...'

Let's hope the rest of the Labout Group agree with Cllr Miller today - not just on annual elections but Scrutiny. Perhaps he might even suggest that abolition of the whip would go some way to provide more democracy 'whenever practicable'.

Chalkhill Park planting comes into glorious flower

Just a year after opening Chalkhill Park is looking stunning this week as the plants come into flower. Congratulations to Garth McWilliam and the team.

(Wild flower meadow)

Will changes to Brent's Planning Code address the real issues?

In addition to the constitutional changes already covered on Wembley Matters there are also recommendations for revisions to the Members' Code of Conduct and Licensing and Planning Codes of Practice.

Planning decisions in Brent have been controversial not least because departmentally it comes under the same Director and Lead Member as Regeneration and Growth.  Andy Donald, Strategic Director of Regeneration and Growth has expressed the view that belief that the local authority should have the role of smoothing the way for developers.

Fiona Ledden's report states:

The aspect specific to planning identified as benefiting from inclusion in the Code was the position where the Council is the applicant or landowner.

The issue may appear dry and dull but arguably has the most impact on the lives of local people in somewhere like Willesden Green where the Council was giving land to a developer in exchange for the building of a new Cultural Centre and where the Council relieved the developer of any duty to provide affordable housing.

The question is whether the revised code will in any way give residents a voice faced with the Council-Developer combo.

The amendments can be found HERE but I will highlight some of the changes for the benefit of readers so that they can answer the above question for themselves.

Members of the Planning Committee are warned:

If a member does not abide by this Code the member may put the Council at risk of proceedings on the legality or maladministration of the related decision; and the member may be at risk of either being named in a report of the Audit and Governance Committee or Council; or if the failure to abide by the Code is also likely to be a breach of the Member Code of Conduct, of a complaint made to the Monitoring Officer.

The disclosure of 'disclosable pecuniary interests' is added to the requirements and members are told that decisions should not be influenced by the interests of Councillors or because of pressure exerted by applicants, agents or third parties. A new paragraph is inserted:

Members of the Planning Committee must take decisions in the public interest and take account of only of material planning considerations. They should not allow themselves to be influenced by members of the public and applicants, agents or third parties who might approach them and they should not be influenced by party politics.

There is something rather odd about having to take decisions in the public interest but also not being influenced by the public. This is reinforced by the duty to follow the 'rules of natural justice' and give people a hearing:

The rules of natural justice include the duty to act fairly, the duty to give all those who will be affected by a decision the opportunity of a hearing before a decision is made; and the principle that no person should be a judge in his or her own cause. That principle means that members must be and be seen to be be impartial and without bias, and that members should not take part in any decision that affects their own interests.

A section of 'Bias and Predetermination' has been added:

Members should not take a decision on a matter when they are actually biased in favour or against the application, or when it might appear to a fair and informed observer that there was real possibility of boas, or where a member has predetermined the matter by closing their mind to the merits of the decision before they come to take it.

 ...A member taking part in a decision on a planning matters must be open to any new arguments about the matters up until the moment of a decision. A member should not comment or make any commitment in advance as to how they intend to vote which might indicate that they have closed their mind. Any planning decision made by a member who can be shown to have approached the decision with a closed mind will still expose the council to the risk of legal challenge.

The section on Interests has been amended to allow a member with a disclosable pecuniary interest to have a right to attend a meeting:

...where a member of the public has the right to attend the meeting, make representations, answer questions, or give evidence, then a member will have the same right. Once the member has exercised that right then they must withdraw from the room for the rest of that item and play no further part in the discussion or vote,

At present many planning decisions are made by officers alone but Council members have the power to 'call-in' decisions so that they will be decided by Committee. The Code is amended:

A member considering using the 'call-in' power should consider whether their objective could be achieved by an alternative means, for example by discussing the matter further with the relevant officer or facilitating a meeting between the objector and an officers, bearing in mind the additional cost to the council when a matter has to be considered by Committee. 

The key issue of planning submissions where the council is the applicant or landowner is covered by this paragraph:

Where the council itself is the landowner or planning applicant then a Planning member should consider whether he or she has had such a significant personal involvement in advocating or preparing or submitting the planning proposal that the member would be likely to be perceived as longer able to act impartially or to determine the proposal purely on its planning merits. A member would not be required to withdraw simply because they were, for example, a member of both the Cabinet, or a proposing committee, as well as the planning committee, However a member with a relevant portfolio or individual  responsibility for implementing a particular policy should carefully consider whether that role makes it inappropriate for them to participate in a particular planning decision.

 Does this sufficiently deal with the wider conflict of interest over the Planning Committee being the judge of the Council's own development schemes?

 On the issue of Committee member site visits a paragraph is added:

Members should take care not to show any apparent partiality to people they already know when acknowledging members of the public or applicants that are present. Members attending the site visit should avoid expressing opinions about the application either to another Planning member, or to any person present.

It begins to look like the three wise monkeys would be ideal members of the Planning Committee!

The local press may be interested in this amendment (38) which adds journalists to the list:

Members of the Planning Committee should not speak to members of the public (including applicants, agents and journalists) during a meeting of the Planning Committee or immediately prior to or after the meeting concerned, other than where permitted by this Code of Conduct.

I am sure that a case could be made in terms of freedom to report that journalists are rather more than 'members of the public'.

It is worth including in this report the existing Code in regard to Member and Officer relations which has been an issue in the past:

Any criticism by members of Planning Committee of officers in relation to the handling of any planning matters shall be made in writing to the Strategic Director Regeneration and Growth and not to the officer concerned. No such criticism shall be raised in public.

If any officer feels or suspects that pressure is being exerted upon him or her by any member of the Council in relation to any particular planning matter, he or she shall forthwith notify the matter in writing to the Strategic Director Regeneration and Growth.

A substantial section has been added to the Code requiring Planning Committee members to undergo a course of training on the planning system:

If a member of the Planning Committee fails to participate in compulsory elements of the training this may result in that member being asked to stand down as a member of the Planning Committee,

Scrutinising Brent's Scrutiny Proposals

A Wembley Matters reader has given the proposals on new scrutiny arrangements a little scrutiny and found them wanting. Fiona Ledden's proposal is that Brent should have just one Overview & Scrutiny Committee to replace the current five,

In her report Fiona Ledden writes:

“Five committees is a considerably higher number than most other London councils have following a random survey”

This is illogical. A random survey of how many London Boroughs? A higher number than most other London Boroughs we randomly surveyed? A higher number than most of the 32 London Boroughs? How many other London Boroughs are making do with one OSC? What sort of Boroughs are they that are doing that?

Here are 17 London boroughs. They all have more permanent OSC bodies than Brent is proposing,. All bar one has three or more OSCs and the only that comes close is Ealing, which has an OSC ansd a Standing Commitee on Health.

Southwark:

The overview & scrutiny committee (OSC) is the main co-ordinating scrutiny body.  It appoints three scrutiny sub-committees and is responsible for their overall management:

 ·  Education, Children’s Services and Leisure Scrutiny Sub-Committee

·  Health, Adult Social Care, Communities and Citizenship Scrutiny Sub-Committee

·  Housing, Environment, Transport and Community Safety Scrutiny Sub-Committee

Camden

Three of the scrutiny committees mirror the three service directorates, one covers health scrutiny and the fifth will look at corporate resources, performance and policy together with covering the central departments.

Committee membership

• Children schools and families
• Culture and environment
• Housing and adult social care
• Health
• Resources and corporate performance

Lambeth

Lambeth council has six scrutiny committees: the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, which oversees and co-ordinates the work of the sub-committees and the scrutiny function in general; and five cross-cutting sub-committees, which cover issues arising from all our services.

Haringey

The Council has an overarching Overview and Scrutiny Committee which is made up of five non-Cabinet Councillors as well as statutory and non statutory co-optees. Councillors sitting on the Committee reflect the political balance of the Council.  The Committee is supported in its work by four standing scrutiny panels:

• Adults and Health Scrutiny Panel
• Children and Young People Scrutiny Panel
• Communities Scrutiny Panel
• Environment and Housing Scrutiny Panel

Scrutiny panels are made up of between 3 and 7 councillors who are not members of the Cabinet, are chaired by members of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and membership is politically proportional.

Enfield

The Overview & Scrutiny Committee (OSC) coordinates the work of the 6 Scrutiny Panels. Made up of the 6 Chairmen and chaired by the Members and Democratic Services Group Chairman, OSC ensures that the Scrutiny function in Enfield operates smoothly, and organises references from the various panels.

Hounslow

Scrutiny panels

We have three scrutiny panels that oversee the service areas of council business. These are  coordinated by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

From time to time, we set up task and finish scrutiny panels to look into specific issues of concern to scrutiny members. These can be service areas or more general policy areas of relevance to the community. Each task and finish panel is set up just to look at one issue, then disbanded.

Select a panel below to get more information about meeting dates, agendas and reports.

Standing scrutiny panels  

Housing and environment scrutiny panel

Children and young people scrutiny panel

Health and adults care scrutiny panel

Ealing – one OSC but a standing panel on health

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee is able to set up review panels to consider specific issues. The review panels have a fixed term and have to work to an agreed programme.

Standing panel

Health and Adults Social Services This panel is responsible for scrutinising health services in the borough, as well as the council’s provision of social services for adults. The panel recently considered proposed reforms of hospitals across North West London (the Shaping a Healthier Future programme) as well as the merger of Ealing Hospital Trust with North West London Hospitals Trust, and proposals for reforms to dementia services.

Hackney 

Overview and scrutiny board

Made up of the chairs and vice-chairs of the commissions, the overview and scrutiny board coordinates the function and runs special projects to scrutinise council performance.

Scrutiny commissions

Children and young people

We look at all services for children and young people, including those provided by the Hackney Learning Trust and social services.

Community safety and social inclusion

We review issues of crime and community safety. We also look at support for the voluntary sector, community cohesion and adult learning.

Governance and resources

We review the way the council operates, including how the budget is prepared and agreed.

Health in Hackney

We look at all health services, adult social care and services for older people.

Living in Hackney

We have a remit for all housing issues, as well as leisure and culture, planning, sustainability, waste and street cleanliness.

Barnet

At the London Borough of Barnet, there are four Overview and Scrutiny Committees, each with their own Terms of Reference, which sets out their responsibilities and power. These Committees are:  

Budget and Performance Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Business Management Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Safeguarding Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Islington

 Scrutiny in Islington

Reviewing decisions

The Policy and Performance Scrutiny Committee is the council’s main scrutiny committee.  It coordinates the work of the council's four scrutiny review committees and can play an important role in reviewing decisions made by the Executive. If five or more councillors request such a review, the committee can call in a decision made by the Executive before it is implemented and consider if the decision should be recommended back to the Executive for further consideration. If the Policy and Performance Scrutiny Committee considers that the Executive's decision does not follow the council's policy or budgetary framework, it can refer the decision to a meeting of full Council

Greenwich

• Children & Young People Scrutiny Panel
• Finance & Public Services Scrutiny Panel
• Healthier Communities & Older People Scrutiny Panel
• Overview and Scrutiny
• Safer & Stronger Communities Scrutiny Panel
• Social Inclusion Scrutiny Panel
• Sustainable Communities & Transport Scrutiny Panel

Merton

The structure of Overview and Scrutiny at Merton consists of three scrutiny panels and an Overview and Scrutiny Commission.

The three panels each have individual areas of responsibility whilst the Commission supports the panels, oversees the development and delivery of the annual work programme and co-ordinates cross-cutting reviews and responses.

Newham

Scrutiny arrangements differ from council to council. We have an overarching Overview and Scrutiny Committee and five scrutiny commissions:

• Overview and Scrutiny Committee
• Children and Young People Scrutiny Commission
• Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Commission
• Health and Social Care Scrutiny Commission
• Regeneration and Employment Scrutiny Commission

Richmond

Overview and Scrutiny Committees

We have four Overview and Scrutiny Committees, which meet at least six times a year:

• Education and Children’s Services
• Environment, Sustainability and Community
• Finance and Performance
• Health, Housing and Adult Services

Croydon

Three committees

	Health, Social Care and Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee
	Scrutiny and Strategic Overview Committee
	Children and Young People Scrutiny Sub-Committee

Hammersmith & Fulham

The four Scrutiny Committees are: 

• Education and Children's Services Select Committee
• Transport, Environment and Residents Services Select Committee
• Housing, Health And Adult Social Care Select Committee
• Overview & Scrutiny Board

 Lewisham

Overview & Scrutiny

Public Accounts Select Committee

Health & Communities Select Committee

Sustainable Develoment Select Committee

Children and  Yoing Persons Select Committee

Housing Select Committee

Safter & Stronger Communities Select Committee

Brent Labour concentrates power in proposed constitutional changes

The Brent Council Executive will be replaced by a Cabinet of between three and ten members in constitutional changes going before Full Council on Wednesday 4th June. Report HERE

Along with other proposed changes the overall impact is greater centralisation of power in fewer hands. The changes enable Muhammed Butt to reduce the size of the new Cabinet compared with the previous Executive if he so wishes. There have been rumours that this may happen but other sources suggest that a reduction would leave a large number of potentially disruptive Labour councillors disgruntled by thwarted ambitions.

The new Labour group is meeting on Saturday to decide positions in the new adminstration.

Half of Cabinet Meetings will now take place during the day, alternating with evening meetings. At the same time the Council's five scrutiny committees will be reduced to one.

Deputations will now be allowed at meetings of Full Council, allocated a maximum of 15 minutes with a maximum of 5 minutes per speaker. The criteria for such delegations are limiting and leave a considerable amount of power with the officers:

Any deputation must directly concern a matter affecting the borough and relate to a Council function. Deputations shall not relate to legal proceedings or be a matter which is or has been the subject of a complaint under the Council's complaints processes. Nor should a deputation be frivolous, vexatious or defamatory. The Director of Legal and Procurement [Fiona Ledden] shall have discretion to decide whether the deputation is for any reason inappropriate and cannot proceed.

There shall be a maximum of 3 deputations at any one council meeting on different subject matters. There shall be no more than one deputation made by the same person or organisation in a six month period and no repetition of the subject.

Standing Order 40 for Full Council which allowed for debate on 'Key Issues affecting the borough' is deleted as 'it no longer serves a purpose'.

Standing Order 39 'Questions from the Opposition and Non-Executive Members' will be amended to provide that questions are given in writing 7 days in advance with no supplementary questions allowed. The number of questions will be amended 'to reflect the new political balance of the Council'.

Further it is proposed under Standing Order 45 that 'the number of motions and the debate in relating to motions be amended to reflect the new political balance of the Council.

Following the Labour landslide the membership of Council committees is revised with no Liberal Democrat representation:

General Purposes Labour 9 Conservative 1
Planning Labour 10 Conservative 1
Audit Labour 4 Conservative 1
Standards Labour 4 Conservative 1
Corporate Parenting Labour 4 Conservative 1

The Scrutiny Committee, now a single entity and clearly important in terms of holding the Council to account, will have 7 Labour and 1 Conservative member plus 4 voting co-opted members and 2 non-voting co-opted members. This gives the Labour members a voting majority.

Only Labour and Conservatives will qualify for the appointment of political assistants.

The Appendix below which contains tracked changes to the Constitution reveals the extent of the proposals:

Public Discussion: The Legacy of World War 1/Hero Stones in Willesden Green

From Brent Stop the War

A discussion with DEFEND SCHOOL HISTORY on Teaching WW1

and with the NO GLORY CAMPAIGN ARTISTS GROUP

on Hero Stones in Willesden Green

The Government is trying to rehabilitate WW1 as a noble war fought for a just cause and to use the centenary as a celebration of Britishness. Michael Gove tried to introduce a new history curriculum modelled seemingly on Billy Bunter’s at Greyfriars School and has criticised Blackadder, Oh What a Lovely War! and Horrible Histories for detracting from the glorious sacrifice of those who died. Defend School History is a campaign that was set up to counter Gove’s proposals for the History Curriculum and has succeeded in forcing considerable changes.

One of the Government’s schemes to celebrate the glories of the war is to lay paving stones commemorating every soldier who was awarded a Victoria Cross. This is something that the VCs themselves would have opposed strongly. The first of these ceremonies will be in Willesden Green in August. The No Glory Campaign aims to use art and performances to counter the myth of the Glorious war. Their artists group is looking for ways to shift the emphasis from individual “heroes” to the many whom were killed or maimed in the conflict.

There will be speakers from these two campaigns at our meeting. Camden Stop the War and teachers from Brent and Camden are cordially invited.

Monday June 9^th  Doors open 7.00 pm, meeting starts 7.30 pm sharp  Rumi’s Cave 26, Willesden Lane NW6 7ST