(if any) - receive.

Apologies were received from Councillor Natasha Summers, Councillor David Durant substituting.

Members are invited to disclose any interest in any of the items on the agenda at this point of the meeting.

Members may still disclose any interest in an item at any time prior to the consideration of the matter.

There were no disclosures of interest.

Attached for noting by the Board.

The protocol on the operation of Board meetings during the pandemic was noted by the Board.

Attached for noting by the Board.

The pre-decision scrutiny protocol was noted by the Board.

Report and appendices attached.

 A report to Cabinet on the Inclusive Growth Strategy had been referred to the Board for pre-decision scrutiny.

Officers explained that the Inclusive Growth Strategy set out a guide to economic development and growth in Havering over the next 25 years. The majority of projects in the strategy were already ongoing and resourced. The Cabinet Member added that the report set out principles and aspirations in this area and that it was planned to increase inward investment and regeneration.

Comments from Members included that there was a need to progress the Rainham CIL but 15.4 hectares of land were being lost from this area. It was felt that the impact of Brexit should be mentioned in the strategy and that aspirations for improved infrastructure may be too ambitious. There was also a feeling that ‘dirty’ industries should not be diverted from Barking & Dagenham.

Officers agreed about not allowing the diversion of ‘dirty’ industries into Havering and also that Havering should not become a dormitory borough. The impact of Brexit was unpredictable and, whilst North-South infrastructure would be explored, there was no commitment at this stage. Whilst the London Mayor wanted to move commercial land to residential purposes, there was a wish any net loss of commercial land in Havering. It was hoped to move towards higher value industries with a higher network of jobs and salaries.

A consultant had been asked to comment on the inward investment aspects of the strategy and officers would confirm the cost of this work. Officers agreed that it was important to have clear targets and timescales in the implementation plan. A lot of engagement with local residents had been undertaken already and this was expected to continue. The cost of infrastructure and the associated delivery plan had been discussed at the Joint Venture Working Party and the process aimed to encourage investment to fund this. Even in the current difficult period, there remained opportunities to attract investment from Central Government.

Concerns were raised that the strategy showed difficulties around the provision of post-16 education and the need to resolve infrastructure issues. A clear list of priorities should be included and a Member added that perhaps the strategy should be paused until the details of the national financial settlement for local government were known.

It was confirmed that businesses that had to move due to regeneration works etc would be relocated within the borough. Officers confirmed that the Public Works Loan Board was currently consulting on no longer loaning for commercial ventures.

It was also felt there should be mention in the policy of how investment can be made in local shops and parade and that there should be a strategy to integrate new communities with older ones. An Equalities Impact Assessment of the strategy had indicated that there should not be any disproportionate impact on disadvantaged groups. The issue of local shopping parades would be included in the final strategy and the Council did have a High Streets and Local Centres officer. Officers agreed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

Report and appendices attached.

The Chief Operating Officer advised that £19m of savings had been put forward but that a further £8m was still required to be found. The impact of Covid-19 had made budget setting difficult although extra funding received had meant the deficit had been reduced overall from £13m to £10m. It was unclear at this stage if further Covid support funding would be provided by the Government next year.

There was an expected shortfall of £7m on savings delivery and officers were looking at which savings were still likely to be deliverable in 2021/22. It was accepted that it would be a challenge to deliver the savings required although Havering had a low unit cost compared to its benchmarking authorities.

Most proposed savings were in Adult Social Care although it was felt these could also lead to better outcomes. Revised commissioning arrangements should also lead to savings in children’s services and housing (via Mercury Land Holdings). Other savings would be achieved via improved service delivery and efficiency in the Neighbourhoods directorate and via increased use of digital services. The increased use of Smarter Working by Council staff would also lead to savings.

There would be an electronic consultation on the budget proposals. Risks to the budget included an increase in the demand for adult social care and the impact of business failure. The requirement to maintain social distancing in facilities such as leisure centres would also impact on revenues.  It was confirmed that the level of the Greater London Authority precept was unknown at this stage.

A report on the future use of Mercury House was due to be taken to Cabinet in January 2021. Officers that the building was very dated and that increased levels of working from home could mean the building would no longer be needed. Negotiations on the future use of the building were currently in progress with the landlord.

It was felt that the increased use of technology would allow further efficiencies to be introduced. It was hoped to received around £4m from the Government in view of the loss of income to the Council but officers added that fees and charges could be in excess of this.

It was confirmed that consultation would take place on any extension to the School Streets Scheme. The Better Living Scheme, which aimed to promote independence and keep people in their own homes was now generating larger savings. Staff working from home had been found to be more productive and communication between staff was now easier.

Officers did not feel that their use of the word ‘pandemic’ in the report was inappropriate. It was the responsibility of the Council to keep its residents as safe as possible. Officers were also optimistic that the stated savings could be delivered and felt that there had been a reasonable level of funding from the Government, albeit with parameters on how the money could be spent.

The Government was covering 75% of 95% of Council losses due to the pandemic. Staff reductions would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.