Issue - meetings

RESOLVED:

·         that the Chair of the Committee, in collaboration with the Head of Scrutiny and Policy, would formulate a plan for advancing the co-optee proposal and its implementation, to be presented at the next Committee meeting.

Charlotte Dale (Head of Scrutiny and Policy) introduced the report, accompanied by Jeremy Chambers (Director of Law and Corporate Governance). The following key points were noted:

3.1. It was noted that the Committee’s intention was to ensure that the views and needs of social housing tenants informed the recommendations that the Committee made on policies and decisions that affect them.

3.2. Two primary approaches were discussed for achieving this goal.

3.2.1.   The first approach emphasised enhanced tenant engagement, which included inviting tenants to participate as expert witnesses in formal meetings, attending more informal sessions or focus groups, and conducting site visits to social housing estates or participating in TRA (Tenant and Residents’ Associations) or similar meetings.

3.2.2.   The second approach involved the establishment of one or more co-optee positions, wherein tenants/leaseholders would assume the role of additional formal committee members, aiding in the evaluation of evidence and actively contributing to the discussion and subsequent recommendations.

3.3. The report comprehensively outlined the considerations associated with each option. Regarding the formal co-optee option, it also delineated the relevant constitutional processes that would need to be followed.

The Committee members were invited to ask questions. The following key points were noted:

3.4. The discussion highlighted the importance of formal co-optees having to declare conflicts of interests. The Committee Chair stated that in the past, some councillors sitting on the committee had also been Lewisham Homes tenants and since this Committee wasn’t a decision-making body, the conflict of interest didn’t disqualify them from contributing to the discussion. The Director of Law and Corporate Governance emphasised that declaring interests was required in formal council meeting regardless of whether decisions were going to be made or not; and that had the councillors who had also been Lewisham Homes tenants had a direct pecuniary interest in the item under discussion, they would have needed to have declared a prejudicial interest and left the meeting room.

3.5. Formal co-optees would have to adhere to the same code of conduct as councillors, including declaring interests. However, declaring an interest did not automatically disqualify someone from the discussion, this was only the case where the interest was deemed prejudicial, such as a direct financial interest. Informal attendees and expert witnesses would not be bound by this code of conduct.

3.6. The discussion emphasised that while it was important for the Committee to hear from residents, it was also important to understand the optimal method for soliciting their input and determining the most effective approach to resident engagement.

3.7. It was discussed that while considering a formal co-option scheme, factors such as the selection process for co-optees (appointment or election) and associated costs, also needed to be considered.

3.8. The Committee acknowledged that formal co-optees from specific organisations might have a narrow focus and could lack interest in all items on the Committee’s agenda, rendering their full meeting attendance inefficient.

3.9. It was noted that no other local authority with co-optees on their Housing Select Committee or its equivalent, granted voting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3