Agenda item

Social Impact Bonds

The Chair reported that Councillor Bell, who had raised concerns over Social

Impact Bonds was unable to be present. However the questions he had

raised had been addressed as shown below and Councillor Bell had

confirmed in writing to the Chair that he considered the responses made to be

satisfactory and that he had no objections to the Mayor’s decision.

Questions from Councillor Paul Bell on Social Impact Bonds (SIBs) and

the officer response:

1) Written assurances that Bridges pay UK tax on income

Bridges Fund Management Ltd is incorporated in the UK, and as such is

liable to tax on its profits at the standard UK corporation tax rate.

2) Written assurances that De Paul offer guaranteed hours to any staff

involved in the project, do not use zero hours contracts and recognise trade

unions

All staff employed on this project will be employed on permanent or

fixed term contracts. Depaul will not be using any zero hours contracted

staff to deliver this project. All staff are paid above the London Living

Wage. Depaul incorporate TU representation into all ‘people’ processes, although they don’t have a recognition agreement in place with a

particular union. 

?

3) A copy of De Paul’s equal opportunities/equalities statement, particularly

relating to LGBT+ care leavers

I have attached separately the current version of DePaul’s Equality,

Inclusion and Diversity Statement.

4) That elected representatives (MPs & councillors) can intervene and have

some control when/if things go wrong

Elected representatives can raise concerns through members’

enquiries, either directly or via the lead member, officers can further

provide reports to the corporate parenting, CYP partnership boards

and/or CYP Select Committee

5) That annually (subject to the CYP Committee agreeing in its work

programme) the SIB is reviewed for its benefit to care leavers and a robust

analysis of what De Paul and Bridges have been doing including financially

Officers will be requiring detailed performance and financial information

quarterly as part of the contract monitoring process and will require

even more detailed information annually.

6) That LBL ask resolutely that the SIB is subject to FOI and public scrutiny

and that neither De Paul nor Bridges hide behind commercial confidentiality

Both Depaul and Bridges have committed to supporting us to respond

to FOIs as fully as possible.  

 7) Written assurances that we will not tolerate failure

an approach where we maximise the return from the investor for our care

leavers and those of Greenwich and Bromley, frustrating attempts for the

investor to make profit from tax payers.

We will be monitoring performance closely, as well as seeking to use the

grant from DfE to its maximum to deliver outcomes from young people.

The SIB is set up so the investor is paid for outcomes, and won’t be paid

for those they do not deliver.

Having tabled these responses, the Executive Director for Children & Young

People then presented the report and confirmed there was no financial risk to

the Local Authority.

Councillor Sorba sought details on performance monitoring and asked if there

were processes in place to terminate the contract before the end of the three

year length should the local authority be dissatisfied. The Executive Director

for Children & Young People said contractual arrangements allowed for a six

months notice period but this could be a shorter period should there become

major concerns such as on safeguarding.

The Chair received confirmation that this was a pilot project and he asked if it

would be evaluated. The Public Health Commissioning Manager stated that

as well as Lewisham’s normal evaluation process, the Department for

Education would be carrying out its own evaluation of the project. Business

Panel members agreed that it was a important that an evaluation be

considered at Mayor & Cabinet.

RESOLVED that the report be noted and the Mayor asked to ensure an

evaluation of the project was considered at Mayor & Cabinet.

Beckenham Place Park

The report was presented by the Beckenham Place Park Project Manager.

The Chair asked if there had been any public involvement in letting the

landscaping contracts. The Project Manager said that was not required and

there had been an open tender process. The Chair said he believed

stakeholders more widely should be involved. He reminded the Business

Panel that they had several times previously endorsed requests that

stakeholder and public involvement should be increased.

The Business Panel accepted a proposal from the Chair that they reinforce

previously expressed concerns by calling for a root and branch strategic The

Business Panel requested that there be a root and branch strategic review of

the Beckenham Place Park and Mansion Regeneration Strategy which would

ensure more public involvement and buy in from the residents of all the

surrounding wards in both Lewisham and Bromley.

RESOLVED that the report be noted and  a referral be made to the Mayor

asking for a root and branch strategic review of the Beckenham Place Park

and Mansion Regeneration Strategy to ensure greater public involvement in,

and support for, the development of proposals.