Agenda, decisions and minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the last meeting held on 21 September 2020 be agreed as a true and accurate record of the proceedings.

The Chair opened the meeting and welcomed Oluwafela Ajayi to the Committee. Fela had recently been elected as the co-opted Parent Governor Representative for Special Schools.

Lilian Brook and Councillor Octavia Holland had sent apologies for non-attendance. Councillors Jacq Paschoud and Sophie Davis had sent apologies for lateness.

It was noted that Councillor John Paschoud was in attendance, as was his entitlement under the council’s constitution. The Chair granted him the right to participate in the discussion and ask questions.

The Chair changed the order of the meeting to hear items in the following order:

1.    Minutes of the last meeting

2.    Declarations of Interest

3.    CAMHS update nad Q&A with Sir Norman Lamb

4.    BAME attainment

5.    Budget Cuts

6.    Response to Referrals

7.    Work Programme.

The minutes of the 21 September meeting were agreed without discussion.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the last meeting held on 21 September 2020 be agreed as a true and accurate record of the proceedings.

RESOLVED that the following declared interests be noted:

1.    Cllr Luke Sorba is Lewisham Council’s appointee on the Council of Governors of the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) NHS Trust (relevant to Item 5 – CAMHS update)

2.    Councillor Liz Johnston-Franklin is the Lewisham Council Representative on the Board of Youth First (relevant to Item 4 – Budget Cuts)

3.    Councillor Jacq Paschoud is a Trustee of the short breaks provider previously known as the Ravensbourne Project. (relevant to Item 4 – Budget cuts)

4.    Councillor John Paschoud, spouse of Councillor Jacq Paschoud, declared his spouse’s interests as he is required to do under the constitution.

RESOLVED that the following declared interests be noted:

1.    Cllr Luke Sorba is Lewisham Council’s appointee on the Council of Governors of the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) NHS Trust (relevant to Item 5 – CAMHS update)

2.    Councillor Liz Johnston-Franklin is the Lewisham Council Representative on the Board of Youth First (relevant to Item 4 – Budget Cuts)

3.    Councillor Jacq Paschoud is a Trustee of the short breaks provider previously known as the Ravensbourne Project. (relevant to Item 4 – Budget cuts)

4.    Councillor John Paschoud, spouse of Councillor Jacq Paschoud, declared his spouse’s interests as he is required to do under the constitution.

RESOLVED that

1.    The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and School Performance would explore the concerns raised by the Committee and email a response. The concerns were:

a)    Paragraph 5.6 of the response appeared to show a marked decrease but in fact the last figure reported represented a significantly shorter reporting period than previous figures.

b)    The response did not adequately address the Committee’s concerns.

2.    The CYP Select Committee would keep under review IT performance insofar as it affects the work of the Children and Young People’s Directorate.

Councillor John Paschoud, who had been a Member of the Committee when the matter had been referred and was now attending the meeting under Standing Orders, shared his views on the response as follows:

·         the number of IT fault ‘events’  was evidence of a serious situation and had not been properly remedied;

·         Paragraph 5.6 of the response appeared to show a marked decrease in the number of events whereas in fact the latest figure represented a much shorter reporting period than previous figures;

·         That IT systems elsewhere that do a better job of supporting Children’s Services;

·         The Council’s IT offering may be better than it once was, but it was not as good as it could or should be. Expectations were too low;

·         That serious IT breakdowns were being considered as acceptable;

·         The Committee should continue to monitor IT performance in the context of scrutinising the work of the Children and Young People’s Directorate.

The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and School Performance responded that he would follow up with the Director of Children’s Social Care to find out whether the IT continued to cause problems. His feeling was that whereas in the past IT was mentioned regularly as a barrier to performance, he was hearing fewer complaints and therefore the problems may have been resolved.

RESOLVED that

1.    The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and School Performance would explore the concerns raised Committee and email his findings to the Committee. The concerns were:

a)    the number of IT fault ‘events’  was evidence of a serious situation and had not been properly remedied;

b)    Paragraph 5.6 of the response appeared to show a marked decrease in the number of events whereas in fact the latest figure represented a much shorter reporting period than previous figures;

c)    That IT systems elsewhere that do a better job of supporting Children’s Services;

d)    The Council’s IT offering may be better than it once was, but it was not as good as it could or should be. Expectations were too low;

e)    That serious IT breakdowns were being considered as acceptable.

2.    The CYP Select Committee would keep under review IT performance insofar as it affects the work of the Children and Young People’s Directorate.

RESOLVED that the following referral be made to Mayor and Cabinet:

The Children and Young People Select Committee requests that the following information be included in all upcoming the Budget Cuts reports:

1.    The impact of a proposed cut on the users of a service

2.    The impact of a proposed cut on the staff of a service

3.    The impact of the proposed cut on the service overall

4.    The cumulative impact of the cut on the London Borough of Lewisham as a whole.

Pinaki Ghoshal – Executive Director for Children and Young People gave a brief introduction to the Budget Cuts report. He explained the approach taken as follows:

1.    the report had been prepared prior to the government’s Comprehensive Spending Review that had been announced the previous day. Some information was therefore slightly out of date.

2.    Responding to the Covid-19 pandemic had created a budget shortfall of £68m of which approximately £30m was due to costs and the remaining circa £38m was a result of lost revenue. While some central government funding was being provided, this would not be enough to meet the entire cost.

3.    Additionally there would be a CYP budget overspend of slightly less than £10m at the end of this financial year, and some would flow into the next financial year, largely due to the cost of social care placements for children.

4.    Even without the additional financial pressures brought about by Covid-19, there was expected to be a £40m budget cut over the next 3 years, of which £34m was to be made in the next financial year.

5.    Officers had taken a themed approach to finding ways of making savings and cuts, which each Executive Director leading on a theme that was not directly related to their business area.

In response to questions from the Committee, the following was noted:

1.    In recent months there had been a reduction in the unit cost of residential placements, as well as a reduction in the number of children requiring residential placements. These measures were aimed at reducing the overspend on placement costs, and not at reducing the budget.

2.    Regarding the proposed saving on short breaks provision, one Member was concerned that overly tight gatekeeping was preventing parents from being able to access the short breaks provision that they needed. Officers responded that the reduction was relatively small, and some of this would be met in 3 ways:

a.    by looking at provision costs as costs varied greatly between providers

b.    by organising staffing in a more efficient and effective way, and not using social workers by default

c.    Looking to increase the uptake of personal budgets to give families more choice, rather than having to use the local authority offer

3.    Members had concerns about cutting funding for transition services when moving from children’s to adult’s social care. The Committee heard that work was underway to set up a new transition service, which would utilise staff with adult’s social care experience as well as staff with children’s social care experience, and would be working with families with children from age 14+. It was hoped that this would lead to a better transition experience for families.

4.    The saving of £1.2m relating to partner contributions to children in care placements combined 3 elements

a.    Housing Benefit – there were currently young people in care eligible for but not been claiming. Systems had been corrected to ensure the council no longer pays the provider for the equivalent amount  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

RESOLVED that the information in the report and points raised in discussion be noted.

The Chair welcomed Sir Norman Lamb – Chair of South London and Maudsley (SLaM) NHS Trust Council of Governors, Dr Omer Moghraby – Lead Clinician, CAMHS, Brenda Bartlett – Deputy Director of CAMHS, Harold Bennison – Director of CAMHS, to the meeting.

Harold Bennison gave a brief presentation summarising the information in the report (slides were tabled), followed by Sir Norman Lamb addressing the committee. It was noted that:

1.       SLaM NHS Trust was one of four pilot areas across England trialling a new approach called the Parent and Carer Race Equality Framework. This involvedsmental health trusts working with communities to identify gaps in the data and getting a clear picture of where inequality exists eg young black men are disproportionately affected by compulsory detention under Mental Health Act and more likely to be subject to restraint on the ward. By fully understanding the existing data and identifying where data gaps exist, the Trust will work to address and hopefully eradicate the inequalities.

2.       The other 3 Trusts involved in the pilot are located in Greater Manchester, East London and the East Midlands.

3.       The Board of Governors was working on a vision and had reached broad agreement that directly confronting race dimension would be a core element of the vision. This was important both in terms of services to communities, but also internally as an organisation. Addressing over-representation of some ethnic groups within the organisation in disciplinary action was given as an example.

4.       Reverse mentoring for all members of the Board was being put in place. All Board members would be linked up with a member of BAME staff to properly understand the experience of BAME staff within the organisation.

5.       The Trust was working alongside local authorities and had been involved in a prevention summit, taking the approach of mental health as a public health issue. Communities were experiencing rising stress due to the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact on employment, health, education, isolation, etc. By April the Trust expected to have an action plan in place, covering whole of South London. Nationally, SLaM NHS Trust was leading the way on dealing with the mental health impact of the pandemic.

6.       CAMHS was working in schools, using CBT in primary schools for whole class work, with good results and the potential to roll out nationally

7.       Australia had created a model youth service called ‘Head Space’ which was easy access, non-stigmatised and available on a self-referral basis. It covered all issues of importance to children and young people, in addition to mental health. Currently in the UK too many people are waiting too long or not getting onto waiting list because of high thresholds. Sir Norman argued that the government should fund something like Head Space in the UK. Stepped timely care is better than over pathologising and sitting on a long waiting list. Early access to help is essential for good mental health outcomes.

A Q&A followed and the following was noted:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Report to Follow

RESOLVED that the information in the report be noted and visits to schools be arranged in 2021 (if local Covid restrictions permit) for Committee members to talk directly to schools about how they are responding to the 3 year race equality action plan for schools.

Pinaki Ghoshal, Executive Director for Children and Young People, gave a short presentation on BAME attainment (slides were tabled).

The following was noted in response to questions from the Committee:

1.       One Member asked what the link was between the curriculum and lower attainment rates for Black Caribbean children and young people (CYP), and why this group was more affected relative to other BAME CYP.

2.       Research shows that lack of Black role models in positions of power in institutions has a profound effect on young black people, especially those identifying as Black Caribbean. There is a disconnect between their identity and their relationship to people in power.

3.       Community and family dynamics also played a key role. 3^rd and 4^th generation Chinese were not at the same level of educational attainment as 1^st and 2^nd generation. Poverty and racism were just some of a range of indicators that interplay to have a more disproportionate effect on Black Caribbean CYP than on other ethnic groups.

4.       Feedback from residents regarding Black History Month indicated that the teaching of Black History still had a Western, traditional focus.

5.       Overall the national curriculum had shifted towards traditional-style learning or facts and figures, with less investigating, however schools had some flexibility to decide content and focus within the curriculum. The Council could work with schools to generate discussion about what would be relevant to the local population, but it could not mandate what schools teach.

6.       Officers were actively engaging with Black Caribbean communities with a view to creating a new supplementary school.

7.       £100,000 has been invested by Lewisham Learning to the programme to embed race equality in schools

8.       Embedding race equality in schools is a 3 year programme. Success in 3 years would look include

a.       Disproportionality in exclusions no longer existing

b.      Raised attainment – this would take longer than 3 years but should be able to see clear improvement in outcomes across all key stages within 3 years

c.       Destinations – softer indicator but hope to hear positive stories about where students go on to after school

9.       When restrictions are lifted, visits to schools would be arranged to give Committee Members the opportunity to talk to schools and pupils to hear about what changes are being made.

10.   Schools were working on a pledge and once this was finalised, it would be displayed prominently in schools and publicised by the council.

RESOLVED that the information in the report be noted and visits to schools be arranged in 2021 (if local Covid restrictions permit) for Committee members to talk directly to schools about how they are responding to the 3 year race equality action plan for schools.

RESOLVED that consideration of the Mayor and Cabinet response to the referral “How Living in Temporary Accommodation Affects Children and Young People” be postponed to March 20201 to allow it to be considered alongside the scheduled 6 month update.

The work programme was noted, and it was agreed that consideration of the officer response to the referral that this Committee had made to the Mayor and Cabinet on “How Living in Temporary Accommodation Affects Children and Young People” be postponed to March 20201 to allow the Committee to consider it at the same time as the scheduled 6 month update.

RESOLVED that consideration of the officer response to the referral that this Committee had made to the Mayor and Cabinet on “How Living in Temporary Accommodation Affects Children and Young People” be postponed to March 20201 to allow the Committee to consider it at the same time as the scheduled 6 month update.