Agenda and minutes

Councillor Conneely (as Chair) welcomed members of the Scrutiny Committee to the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors, Ahmadi-Moghaddam, Maurice and Shah.

Councillor Muhummed Butt (Leader of the Council) attended the meeting as a substitute for Councillor Mili Patel (Cabinet Member for Finance & Resources).

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, the nature and existence of any relevant disclosable pecuniary or personal interests in the items on this agenda and to specify the item(s) to which they relate.

There were no declarations of interest raised during the meeting.

To hear any deputations received from members of the public in accordance with Standing Order 67.

No deputations were raised at the meeting.

To approve the minutes of the previous meetings as a correct record:

·            Thursday 3 April 2025

·            Wednesday 23 April 2025

It was RESOLVED that the minutes of the previous meetings held on Thursday 3 April 2025 and Wednesday 23 April 2025 be approved as a correct record.

The opportunity was also taken to provide feedback for future consideration, noting that where an agenda item contained a proportion of exempt or 'below the line' information, this should be clearly indicated on the agenda, with dedicated time allocated for its separate consideration. It was felt that this approach had not been followed in relation to the recent Call-In meeting, resulting in certain matters not being adequately discussed.

The Chair undertook to raise this issue with the Scrutiny Team and relevant Corporate Directors, to review how information is shared with the Committee while ensuring compliance with public access requirements.

To consider any matters arising from the minutes of the previous meeting.

There were no matters arising raised at the meeting.

The Chair agreed to vary the order of business on the agenda to enable the Resources & Public Realm Scrutiny Committee Work Programme 2025/26 (Agenda Item 9) and Scrutiny Progress Update - Recommendations Tracker (Agenda Item 8) to be considered as the first main items of business on the agenda. The minutes therefore reflect the order in which the items were dealt with at the meeting.

To provide an update on the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee’s work programme 2025-26.

The Chair began by reminding members that the Committee’s Work Programme was a flexible and responsive document. It was noted that the programme had been developed collaboratively with Committee members and informed by feedback and concerns raised throughout the year. The Chair confirmed that, at this stage, the Committee was content to proceed with the current iteration of the Work Programme, while remaining open to future amendments as necessary.

Having reviewed the work programme report, it was RESOLVED to note the Resources & Public Realm Scrutiny Committee work programme for the 2025/26 Municipal Year.

This report presents the scrutiny recommendations tracker for review by the Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee.

The Chair referred to the Housing Management Complaints Annual Report presented at the Committee’s meeting in April 2025. Particular concern had been expressed regarding the data relating to housing, repairs, and maintenance. In response to these concerns, the Committee had requested further scrutiny of the matter and was pleased to welcome the attendance of Tom Cattermole (Acting Corporate Director, Residents and Housing Services), Spencer Randolph (Director Housing Services), and representatives from Wates.

The Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee in relation to Housing Complaints as part of the Housing Management Complaints Annual Report, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• Members queried the overarching strategic plan in place to significantly reduce complaints related to repairs, particularly those of a recurring nature, and also sought clarification on the role of staff training and the extent to which the approach moved beyond incremental improvements. In response, Tom Cattermole (Acting Corporate Director, Residents and Housing Services) confirmed that a strategic review had been undertaken, with a particular focus on staff training and service improvement. The review had been led by Lizzie Skillen (Quality Assurance and Standards Officer) who had prepared a presentation on the subject. In continuing the response, Lizzie Skillen proceeded to outline the scope and findings of the review and informed the Committee that she had joined Brent Council in October 2024, coinciding with the launch of the project. The review had been driven by resident insights and experiences, gathered through surveys and other engagement methods, with the aim of delivering tangible outcomes for residents. It was emphasised that the review sought to overhaul the complaints handling process within Housing Services, with a view to establishing a holistic and resident-focused complaints service. The objective was to rebuild trust, rectify failings, and embed a culture of continuous improvement. Key areas identified for improvement included, systems and guidance, staff training and internal campaigns, governance and performance monitoring, complaint definition, triage, and resolution timeframes, root cause analysis of recurring issues; and data accuracy and reporting mechanisms. Ongoing work to improve housing monitoring and controls around resolution timelines was highlighted, ensuring that outcomes were being met. Members heard that the Housing Management Complaints Annual Report for 2025 was in development and would provide further insight into areas requiring improvement. Close collaboration was underway with Councillor Donnelly-Jackson as the Lead Member for Complaints, to ensure robust oversight and transparency. It was stressed that the project was not seeking quick fixes but rather a fundamental restructuring of the complaints system. The Committee was advised that once the complaints handling framework was firmly established, attention would shift to service improvements informed by complaint insights. It was anticipated that this would lead to a reduction in complaints in targeted areas.

Findings from the review had been disseminated across Residents and Housing Services, contributing to a reframing of the approach to complaints and resident experience. Several headline findings, included:

1)    An overreliance on service requests, resulting in underreporting of complaint;

2)    The need for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The purpose of this report is to provide a comprehensive overview of the council’s recycling performance by waste type (food, paper and card, dry mixed recycling, Garden Waste) and service delivery.

Councillor Krupa Sheth (Cabinet Member for Public Realm & Enforcement) was invited to introduce a report providing a comprehensive overview of the council’s recycling performance by waste type (food, paper and card, dry mixed recycling, Garden Waste) and service delivery. The report provided background information on recycling performance data since the start of the contract in April 2023, which highlighted the recycling finances and improvements made including partnership and communications initiatives. The report also provided an overview of ‘Simpler Recycling’ expectations and upcoming legislative reforms over the next few years. The importance of recycling and the ongoing challenges associated with residual waste was highlighted. It was acknowledged that while progress had been made in improving recycling rates, further efforts were required to meet environmental and financial objectives. Members were reminded that recycling remained a critical priority, not only in contributing to a greener and cleaner Brent, but also in supporting broader climate objectives. It was noted that residual waste disposal continued to rise in cost, placing additional pressure on the Council’s budget.

Having thanked Councillor Krupa Sheth for introducing the report, the Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee in relation to the Update on Recycling in Brent, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• As an initial query, members questioned why Brent and other West London boroughs were achieving recycling rates below 35%, despite estimates suggesting that up to 80% of household waste was recyclable and the Mayor of London’s target being set at 65%. In response, Chris Whyte (Director, Public Realm) advised that the primary barrier to improved recycling performance in Brent was contamination of recycling bins, particularly in communal properties. It was further explained that Brent had a higher proportion of such properties compared to neighbouring boroughs, which compounded the challenge. It was acknowledged that addressing contamination in these settings required more intensive and targeted intervention than in other areas.

• Members further queried whether the financial implications of low recycling rates had been modelled, to which Chris Whyte (Director, Public Realm) confirmed that the cost of sending residual waste to energy from waste facilities, as opposed to recycling, represented a significant financial burden for the Council. It was stated that this had been modelled and was well understood. It was additionally noted that Brent offered a comprehensive recycling service that was broadly compliant with emerging national guidance on simpler recycling. However, it was emphasised that further optimisation was needed, particularly in two key areas, namely - reducing contamination and increasing food waste recycling. It was highlighted that food waste remained the heaviest component of residual waste and that Brent’s food waste recycling service, particularly for flats, was still in the process of being expanded. Confidence was expressed that once the rollout was complete and participation increased, performance would improve significantly. Ealing Council was cited as an example of a borough with high recycling rates, largely due to a well-established and widely adopted food waste recycling service.

• Members referenced the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

This report provides an update on Brent’s overall financial position by examining the financial outturn position for 2025/26, the Q1 financial forecast for 2025/26 and the medium-term financial outlook, which is part of the committee’s role in undertaking budget scrutiny throughout the year.

Minesh Patel (Corporate Director, Finance & Resources) was invited to introduce a budget update on Brent’s overall financial position by examining the Financial Outturn Report for 2024/25, the Quarter 1 financial forecast for 2025/26 and the medium-term financial outlook, which was part of the committee’s role in undertaking budget scrutiny throughout the year and would be considered by Cabinet on 28 July 2025. It was reported that in relation to the Financial Outturn Report 2024/25, the Council continued to face financial pressures, particularly in relation to temporary accommodation. While an overspend had occurred, the final position was less severe than initially forecast, which was considered a positive development, albeit not ideal. It was confirmed that no new financial risks had emerged by the end of the financial year. Regarding the Quarter 1 financial forecast for 2025/26, it was noted that the first quarter of the new financial year remained an early stage in the reporting cycle. Emerging risks were evident, particularly in demand-led services. Despite these pressures, the Council was currently forecasting a breakeven position. Key areas of concern included temporary accommodation, Adult Social Care, and Children’s Services. With regard to the medium-term financial outlook, Minesh Patel provided an update on the Government’s approach to the Spending Review and the long-awaited Fair Funding Review 2.0. It was confirmed that the Government had now published the framework outlining the key areas of focus for the review, including the resetting of funding formulas used to determine the distribution of resources across local authorities. Members heard that a consultation on the Fair Funding Review was currently live, with a deadline of 15 August 2025. The consultation comprised 50 questions, covering all aspects of the proposed funding formulas. Each local authority was expected to submit a response. Disappointment was expressed that the government had not provided a standardised model for authorities to use in assessing the impact of the proposed changes. In the absence of such a model, various London Councils had developed their own, though none were deemed fully reliable due to differing assumptions. It was noted that Brent Council was actively working through the available models in collaboration with London Councils and external advisers. It was confirmed that Brent’s response would incorporate relevant points raised by London Councils but would also be tailored to reflect the borough’s specific circumstances and priorities.

Having thanked Minesh Patel (Corporate Director, Finance & Resources) for introducing the report, the Chair then moved on to invite questions and comments from the Committee in relation to the Budget update & Medium-Term Financial Strategy, with the following comments and issues discussed:

• Members cited figures relating to housing needs, Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) overspend, and supported exempt accommodation, and queried whether these indicators reflected any measurable improvement. In response, Minesh Patel (Corporate Director, Finance & Resources) explained that the figures presented reflected the outturn position, which followed a forecast based on various assumptions. It was noted that significant work had been undertaken by officers during the previous year to reduce financial pressures through savings  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to

the Deputy Director of Democratic and Corporate Governance or their representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 60.

No items of urgent business were identified.