Agenda and minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, Brent Town Hall, Forty Lane, Wembley, HA9 9HD. View directions
Contact: Bryony Gibbs, Democratic Services Officer 020 8937 1355, Email: bryony.gibbs@brent.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Declaration of personal and prejudicial interests Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting any relevant financial or other interest in the items on the agenda. Minutes: None declared. |
|
Deputations (if any) Minutes: There were no deputations. |
|
Minutes of the last meeting held on 19 July 2012 PDF 126 KB Minutes: The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as a correct record subject to the following amendments: -
· Under declaration of personal and prejudicial interests, it should read that Councillor Cheese was a member of the committee for the Kilburn locality, not Chair of the committee. |
|
Brent Youth Parliament update The committee will receive an oral update on the work of the Brent Youth Parliament. Minutes: Thivya Jeyashanker (Co-Chair of the Brent Youth Parliament (BYP)) advised that the 2 year term of office for the current BYP members was drawing to a close and elections would be held on 17 November 2012.
AmerHajan (Youth Worker) informed the committee that he had been undertaking work to strengthen the relationship between the BYP and Brent’s schools. Visits by BYP members to the schools had been received very well and as a result, there had been a greater number of nominations made for candidates for the forthcoming BYP elections. Work was also being carried out to strengthen the role of the BYP executive by creating greater clarity and focus around their duties. The committee was further advised that a new, state of the art, youth centre for young people aged 13 to 19 would be opening in Brent at the start of November 2012. There would be two opening events for the Roundwood Youth Centre and members were reminded that should they wish to attend the event on 1 November 2012, they needed to respond to their e-invites. A further opening event for young people would be held on 2 November 2012.
Thivya Jeyashanker provided a summary of some of the recent key activities undertaken by the BYP. At its meeting on 21 September 2012, representatives of the NHS and Safeguarding team attended in order to consult young people on various related issues including access to mental health and medical advice in schools. Bullying had been raised as an issue of particular significance and the links between this and mental health difficulties had been discussed. Councillor Van Kalwala had also attended this meeting to discuss the issue of gangs in Brent. A UK wide activity run by the UK youth Parliament, in which young people were asked to vote on the most important issues to them, would culminate in a debate in the House of Commons on 23 November 2012. The issue receiving the highest amount of votes would form the subject of a campaign run by the Youth Council. Thivya Jeyashanker concluded by reminding the committee that the last session of the current BYP would be held on 27 November and the attendance of councillors would be welcome.
The Chair thanked AmerHajan for his hard work and several members of the committee expressed their thanks for the contribution of the BYP representatives at the Children and Young People O&S meetings. The Chair noted that the BYP would have its own office at the new Civic Centre.
RESOLVED – That the oral update on the work of the BYP be noted.
|
|
Safeguarding and Looked After Children Inspection Action Plan PDF 70 KB This report identifies the level of progress made by the Brent Social Care against the action plan following the Ofsted and Care Quality Commission Inspection of Safeguarding and Looked After Children provision in Brent. Additional documents: Minutes: Graham Genoni (Assistant Director Social Care Division) presented a report to the committee setting out the progress achieved by Brent Social Care against the action plan which had been developed following the recent Ofsted and Care Quality Commission Inspection of Safeguarding and Looked After Children (SLAC) provision in Brent. Brent had been awarded an adequate grading overall and a good grading for four service components. The adequate rating meant that there had been no major concerns about the safety of children in Brent, but that it had been felt that some additional aspects could have been improved. 50% of local authorities across the country had achieved and adequate rating, 25% had achieved inadequate and a further 25% had achieved a good or outstanding rating. The committee was advised that a new inspection regime was currently being designed for May 2013 and a new temporary inspection framework had been put in place for the interim period. Under this interim regime, those services which had been awarded inadequate and adequate ratings could be subject to a further inspection. The evolving inspection regime reflected a heightening of the expected service standards and it was recognised that it was becoming increasingly difficult to achieve ratings of adequate and above.
Graham Genoni explained that in preparation for this potential further inspection, the council was working hard to address the issues raised in the recent SLAC inspection and those challenges that would be faced by the service in the immediate future. At present the council was working on its own assessment of its SLAC services and would be writing a report to identify the existing strengths and weaknesses. Independent challenge and support was also being sought from colleagues in other local authorities. The council was in the process of developing its early help services. A council-wide project around early help services had just progressed to the initiation stage and work was also being done to explore how the borough’s children’s centres could be developed as a resource for children of a wider age range. It was envisaged that Children’s Centres could provide a medium through which various preventative services could be delivered to families to provide early-stage support, prior to social care intervention. It was hoped that such actions would help to reduce the number of Looked After Children (LAC) in Brent. Work was also being undertaken to reduce the number of irrelevant referrals being dealt with directly by Brent Social Care via the development of a Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub, which would ensure that the most appropriate service acted on each referral. The Council was also seeking to support social workers in accessing greater learning development opportunities and had also recently conducted a survey to better understand the views of Brent’s social workers, particularly in relation to work pressures.
In the subsequent discussion, the committee raised several issues and queries. Councillor Pavey noted that children’s centres were now forming a key focus in the development of early help services and queried why the children’s centres had ... view the full minutes text for item 5. |
|
Child Poverty Strategy 2011 - 2021 PDF 91 KB This report sets out a ten year strategy to address child poverty in the borough. The strategy identifies key priority areas to reduce child poverty through improved collaboration of existing service areas. The strategy has been developed by working closely with the council’s partners. Minutes: Tony Hirsch (Head of Policy and Performance) introduced a report to the committee outlining Brent’s Child Poverty Strategy 2011 – 2021 and detailing the reasons for its development. The Child Poverty Act 2010 required all local authorities to conduct a child poverty needs assessment for their areas and subsequently, to publish a Child Poverty Strategy. Brent’s child poverty needs assessment had been completed in August 2011. Brent currently ranked within the poorest performing 10 per cent against the Child Wellbeing Index (CWI), which measured child wellbeing across a range of different domains, including material wellbeing, education, health and housing. There were currently 34.4 per cent of children under the age of 16 living in poverty in Brent, with the highest rates of poverty being concentrated in the wards of Stonebridge, Harlesden, South Kilburn and parts of Welsh Harp, Barnhill and Alperton. Stonebridge ward contained two of the worst ranked areas in England for the CWI.
Tony Hirsch advised that Brent’s Child Poverty Strategy applied to the entire council and its partners and had been developed through close collaboration with partner agencies and organisations. It was therefore, a high level strategy which set key priorities and objectives for all of Brent. It was anticipated that this strategy would be referenced in other strategies, such as the Children and Young People Plan, and it was in these documents that detailed actions, developed against the overall priorities of the Child Poverty Strategy, would be set out. The strategy set out 6 key priorities for Brent: reduce the poverty levels of children living low income households; support troubled families; reduce the NEET group; improve the financial capacity of parents; support Looked after children and children at the edge of care; and, improve the health and wellbeing of children with a focus on reducing obesity, tooth decay and poor mental health. The strategy was a long term document reflecting that the intergenerational factors influencing poverty were longstanding, cultural and vulnerable to the performance of the national economy. The strategy would be reviewed annually and would be monitored by Partners for Brent. The action plan and associated performance indicators would be monitored by the Executive of Partners for Brent, as well as the individual service areas and partners responsible for their operational delivery.
During members’ discussion, the committee raised a number of issues. Councillor Mitchell Murray commented that the priorities set out in the strategy were very vague and did not adhere to the expected standards of being specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound (SMART). Councillor Mitchell Murray added that it was important not to unrealistically raise peoples hopes and further, queried what the report meant when it indicated that there were ‘no financial implications’. Dr Levison further reiterated that it was important to ensure that the use of language was appropriate and not misleading in terms of the council’s achievable objectives. Councillor Pavey expressed concern that the report did not adequately address how changes would be made but instead focussed on what changes were desired. ... view the full minutes text for item 6. |
|
Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme PDF 84 KB The work programme is attached. The committee will be presented with a list of items related to children and young people’s services currently on the Executive’s forward plan, to decide whether there are items on there they wish to scrutinise. Minutes: The Chair drew members’ attention to the work programme for the committee and welcomed any comments or suggestions. Councillor Pavey suggested that the cuts to the early intervention grant would benefit from further scrutiny.
The Chair advised that a new column had been added to the work programme so that the committee’s recommendations could be recorded. This would aid the committee in reviewing the work it had undertaken throughout the year. The Chair further proposed that the committee attend a pre-meeting to discuss any issues and lines of questioning prior to the committee meeting.
RESOLVED: -
i. that the work programme be amended to include: - a. a report on the impact of the cuts to the early intervention grant b. the Child Poverty Strategy update reports
ii. that pre-meetings be held immediately prior to the meetings of the committee.
|
|
Date of next meeting The next meeting of the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny meeting is scheduled for 11 December 2012. Minutes: The committee noted that the next meeting was scheduled to take place on 11 December 2012. |
|
Any other urgent business Notice of items raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Democratic Services Manager or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 64. Minutes: There was no urgent business. |