Agenda, decisions and minutes

That the minutes of the meeting held on 26 April be agreed as an accurate record of proceedings.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 26 April be agreed as an accurate record of proceedings.

Councillor Colin Elliott declared a personal interest in item 4 as he was the Council representative on Lewisham Disability Commission.

Councillor Jim Mallory declared a personal interest in item 5 as he was Chair of the Governing Board of Abbey Manor College.

Councillor David Michael declared a personal interest in items 5 and 6 as he was on the Lewisham Safer Neighbourhood Board.

Councillor Colin Elliott declared a personal interest in item 4 as he was the Council representative on Lewisham Disability Commission.

Councillor Jim Mallory declared a personal interest in item 5 as he was Chair of the Governing Board of Abbey Manor College.

Councillor David Michael declared a personal interest in items 5 and 6 as he was on the Lewisham Safer Neighbourhood Board.

There are no responses to referrals.

There were no responses to referrals considered at this committee.

There were no responses to referrals considered at this committee.

That the report be noted.

4.1       Andrew Jacobs, Organisational Learning and Talent Manager, presented the report to the committee. In the discussion that followed, the following key points were noted:

·      A question was raised on the experience of employees with a disability. What was being done to support this group as the original findings had shown lower levels of satisfaction amongst this group of employees? The committee heard that a lead officer had been appointed to support the staff forum. Work was being done to support employees with disabilities and to obtain missing data to help get a more accurate staff profile.

·      More information on the outcomes of targets that have been achieved would be useful to the Committee. The survey was now two years old and some targets may be less relevant now than at the time of the survey.

·      Improvements to the IT system were having a positive effect on ways of working across the Council.

·      Feedback from “lunch and learn” sessions had been positive. Over 60 employees had attended over the week. Further work would be undertaken with Heads of Service to help identify topics for future sessions.

4.2       RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

That the report be noted.

5.1       Geeta Subramaniam-Mooney, Head of Crime Reduction and Supporting People and Keith Cohen, Lewisham YOS Manager presented the report to the Committee. During their presentation and following questions from members of the Committee, the following key points were highlighted:

·           A summary of YOS statistics was tabled to members of the Committee, a copy of which will be included in the agenda documentation.

·           Data in the tabled item was not fully verified and should be therefore treated as such when considering the information.

·           The YOS was focusing on a trauma-informed model when supporting people in the youth justice system.

·           It was important for all officers and practitioners involved to understand the potential effects of trauma on a young person’s brain and to be trained in working with young people through this approach.

·           Three key performance indicators were: number of young people offending for the first time; number of young offenders who further offend; and number of episodes of young people sent to custody.

·           There had been improvements in all three areas with the number of young people offending being reduced in Lewisham by 26% from 172 in 2015 to 128 in 2016. This was a much greater reduction than in London and Nationally but it was important to note that the numbers in Lewisham were higher originally.

·           The inspectorate had wanted risk management practices to be reviewed, for example, around speech and language support and youth employment. This was now taking place and the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) for Lewisham had recently been updated.

·           Over 100 staff had been trained in the trauma-informed approach and understanding the effects of complex trauma and how to support young people and develop trusted relationships. This included staff from Youth First and XLP. Staff were also trained and supported in dealing with vicarious trauma and how to seek help and support themselves. There had been very positive feedback from staff on this.

·           Good partnership working with the Community Rehabilitation Company and the National Probation Service etc was very important, particularly in relation to understanding and monitoring young people in the youth justice system once they became adults.

·           Resources for the best possible trauma-informed approach would always be challenging. Working with partners and ensuring a similar approach would be key to its success.

·           It would be helpful to have breakdowns for the different costs of different types of remand options.

·           Concerns were raised regarding the high proportion of young people of mixed heritage in the cohort of reoffenders. The Youth Offending Service was investing in a disproportionality tool kit. A copy of Baroness Young’s Review into improving outcomes for Black and/or Asian Men in the Criminal Justice System and the Interim Findings of David Lammy’s review would be circulated to the Committee.

·           Members of the Committee felt it would be useful for councillors to understand more about disproportionality across different sectors and requested that the Chair contact the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny to discuss this further.

5.2       RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

            That the report be noted.

6.1         Geeta Subramaniam-Mooney, Head of Crime Reduction and Gary Connors, Crime Reduction Service Manager presented the strategy to the Committee, during their presentation, the following key points were raised:

·           There has been an increase in sexual violence across London and Lewisham had seen a 20% increase since 2014.

·           The London Mayor’s Office had introduced a new “Child House Model” and was pioneering 2 centres in London based on this multi-agency approach to working and supporting child victims of sexual violence or abuse.

·           The Vice-Chair assumed the Chair of the Committee between 7.55pm and 8pm when the Chair briefly left the room.

·           Evidence from Rochdale had shown that historically there had been situations where victims had been labelled and blamed. A lot of work had been done to ensure victims were supported and not labelled.

·           Gender based violence could affect men and boys and it was important for any victims to be supported and have confidence in the system.

6.2       In the discussion that followed, the following key points were raised:

·           The Lewisham Residents’ Survey had reflected the online challenges faced by under 25s. Concerns were raised on the use of social media sites such as Omegle where members of the Committee had heard of young people being put and risk and encouraged to participate in sexualised behaviour by older users. More could be added to the strategy to emphasise the online risk to young people. Work had been undertaken through the Universal Schools Programme around educating young people and parents on online dangers.

·           Parent skills were being developed and the service had a Home Educators Team to work with young people being home schooled.

·           Indicators of those most at risk from violence had been produced by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and included having a family income of less than £10,000. Lewisham was in the highest quartile for risk in 7 out of the 8 indicators. The WHO model would be circulated to the Committee.

·           The Mayor of London had recently introduced dedicated Police Officers to each Primary and Secondary School in London. The increase in sexual violence in London was predominantly amongst adults and young adults and not in the younger age groups. Statistics around this would be provided to the Committee.

·           There had been no convictions in the UK for Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

·           1 in 38 women in Lewisham will experience a form of sexual violence. A deep analysis into the data was being undertaken to look at profiles and could be shared with the Committee. The data would also be fed into the VAWG strategy.

6.3       RESOLVED:

            That the report be noted.

            That the following recommendations be included as part of the report on demographic change.

1)    That given the high cost of living in London and the comparatively low levels of income after housing costs; London-weighting should better reflect the additional costs faced by employees.

2)    That the National minimum wage for under 25s was a particular concern in London given the changes to housing benefit. It was also important to ensure the London Living Wage remained at an adequate level going forward.

3)    That given the uncertainty around the Britain leaving the EU – more work should be done to ensure that the Council understands the policy and service delivery implications as the situation evolves.

4)    That long and short term demographic trends, birth rates and migration be monitored closely to ensure that the Council is accurately predicting the need for school places and adapting and investing efficiently to meet future need.

5)    That the Council work to enter into joint housing ventures with the private rental sector to create better opportunities for residents, as a potential method of reducing fees to residents, and as a potential income stream for the Council.

6)    That the Council ensures it makes the best possible use of metrics and analytics in informing policy development, budget allocations and decisions on service delivery. Senior officers and politicians should have a solid understanding of the current demographics and future predictions and projections such as 5, 10 and 15 year projections when making their decisions. Resources should be in place to ensure the Council has the capacity to provide this information.

7.1       Katie Wood, Scrutiny Manager presented the report to the Committee and requested that members consider what recommendations they wished to make as a result of the review. In the discussion that followed, the following key points were raised:

·         The Chair’s introduction could include reference to the particular challenges faced by some residents as a result of the welfare reforms and assessment methods such as the capability to work assessment.

·         It was important to keep demographic change under review as it was dynamic and effected all aspects of service delivery.

·         Lewisham would have a new Mayor next year. It would be useful to look at the strategic vision for the borough put forward by the new Mayor.

7.2       RESOLVED:

            That the following recommendations be included as part of the report on demographic change.

1)    That given the high cost of living in London and the comparatively low levels of income after housing costs; London-weighting should better reflect the additional costs faced by employees.

2)    That the National minimum wage for under 25s was a particular concern in London given the changes to housing benefit. It was also important to ensure the London Living Wage remained at an adequate level going forward.

3)    That given the uncertainty around the Britain leaving the EU – more work should be done to ensure that the Council understands the policy and service delivery implications as the situation evolves.

4)    That long and short term demographic trends, birth rates and migration be monitored closely to ensure that the Council is accurately predicting the need for school places and adapting and investing efficiently to meet future need.

5)    That the Council work to enter into joint housing ventures with the private rental sector to create better opportunities for residents, as a potential method of reducing fees to residents, and as a potential income stream for the Council.

6)    That the Council ensures it makes the best possible use of metrics and analytics in informing policy development, budget allocations and decisions on service delivery. Senior officers and politicians should have a solid understanding of the current demographics and future predictions and projections such as 5, 10 and 15 year projections when making their decisions. Resources should be in place to ensure the Council has the capacity to provide this information.

That the scope be agreed.

8.1       Katie Wood, Scrutiny Manager, introduced the scoping paper to the Committee. In the discussion that followed, the following key points were raised:

·         It was important that the transgender community were considered as part of the review.

·         Any work with local faith groups should be very carefully coordinated to ensure there was a relevance and that liaison was carried out in the appropriate way and through the appropriate channels.

·         The scope could be expanded to include other partners such as the NHS and the Metropolitan Police.

·         Youth First and other independent youth groups could be invited to give evidence.

·         Consideration of whether the LGBT community had been disproportionately affected by budget reductions could be relevant.

·         Consideration of the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) was important as part of the evidence the Committee should receive. It was important that this included relevant and comprehensive data on the LGBT community.

·         Concerns were raised that if the scope was expanded too much it would be too wide for a review of this length.

·         The Council as an employer was an important aspect as there was the potential for changing behaviour as a result of finding of the review if they indicated that this was necessary.

·         The misuse of drugs and alcohol amongst the LGBT community was raised as an important issue to be considered.

·         A representative from the trade union could be amongst the potential witnesses for the review.

·         Reports presented to the Healthier Communities Select Committee on HIV services and Public Health Commissioning would be shared with the Committee.

8.2       RESOLVED:

            That the scope for the review be agreed.

That the report be noted.

9.1       Katie Wood, Scrutiny Manager, presented the work programme to the Committee. During the discussion that followed, the following key point was raised:

·         For the Library and Information Service Report due at the next Committee on 12 July, it would be useful to include statistics on e-books and audiobooks in the borrowing statistics information.

9.2       RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

There were no referrals to Mayor and Cabinet.

There were no referrals to Mayor and Cabinet.