Northamptonshire County Council cabinet - July 2019

Over the last few months there have been considerable changes in the Northamptonshire County Council. As with the rest of life this is a mixture of positives and negatives.

Shortly after the implementation of the first section 114 (effective declaration of bankruptcy), Council meeting ceased to be webcast. This has now be re-instated and makes decision making considerable more transparent. The Council's scrutiny committees, which were aligned with the Council’s directorates, were scrapped to have one single overview and scrutiny committee in the autumn. On the positive side, for the first time in fourteen years, (since the administration took control) the chair and one of the vice chair positions were given to opposition councillors. At the beginning of the year, the administration decided that the only councillors that could speak at cabinet would be portfolio holders, the leader and one speaker from each political group. This has the impact of making it quite difficult for back bench councillors to get their voice heard. As a mitigation to this, councillors are now allowed to put questions to portfolio holders on the content of the cabinet papers. These are generally responded to on the day of cabinet, very shortly before the cabinet meetings,  and neither the questions nor the answers are published.

For the cabinet due to take place on Tuesday 9th July, I have submitted the following questions:

1.

I am concerned about the Council’s compliance with the equality act in respect of paying due regard to equality when making decisions.

For this cabinet not one cabinet paper has been equality impact assessed despite two key decisions being made. The administration has repeatedly stressed that it is committed to ensuring that the practice of the Council is of a high standard and delivering good results for all Northamptonshire’s communities. However, I am concerned that there is not transparency in decision making and the way that this impacts the diversity in local communities.

Do cabinet members agree or disagree with this? If they disagree can they advise how they are paying due regard to equality in their decision making?

2. 

There has been a drastic change to the senior management structure of the organisation and a massive reduction in specialists in the authority over the course of the administration’s tenure. These posts would have critically provided support to this kind of analysis to assist cabinet members in taking decisions. I put it that the administration is not paying due regard to equality and this is in breach of legislative requirements.

Do cabinet members agree or disagree with this? Can cabinet member advise how they are getting advice on the equality impact on key decisions and advise how that is documented?

3.

On the establishment of minor works budget for maintained schools, Over the last few years staff have raising in the CCNF concern about the information available relating to asbestos in schools. From the information given by officers event within local authority supported schools there is no clear picture as to the need for action on Asbestos in schools. This is of sufficient priority that not one but all the unions have voiced concern about this. Given this maybe the nature of the activity undertaken it would be salient to ensure that there was an analysis to ensure that decisions about what to under take and where were informed by an Equality Impact Assessment.

Given that this is a key decisions I believe to demonstrate due regard to equality and EqIA is necessary.

 Do cabinet members agree or disagree with this? Can cabinet member advise how they are getting advice on the equality impact on key decisions and advise how that is documented?

4. Corporate Performance Report 2018-19 quarter 4

I express concern about the increase in permanent exclusions

Can the cabinet member provide an analysis of the age/gender/race/disability/SEND breakdown of this? It  has not been supplied in previous requests.

I express concern about the increase in electively home educated children

Can the cabinet member provide an analysis of the age/gender/race/disability/SEND breakdown of this? It  has not been supplied in previous requests.

I express concern about Delayed Transfers of Care (DTOC)

Can the cabinet member provide an analysis of the age/gender/race/disability breakdown of this?

I express concern about the reduction in referrals to Children’s Social Care and reductions in rate of child protection plans

What action is the cabinet member undertaking to address the causes of this?

UPDATE

No response was received before the meeting although one cabinet member (Cllr Fiona Baker - Childrens services portfolio holder) did assure me that she would email a lengthy response. 

You can view the Cabinet meeting here.

Are you in or have children in Abbeyfield, Northampton Academy, Northampton International Academy, Northampton School for Girls, Duston School and Thomas Becket Catholic School

At the Northamptonshire County Council Cabinet meeting on 9^th April 2019 a decision is being taken to spend nearly £2 million on additional school places.

An additional 30 places will be in each of Abbeyfield, Lings Academy, Duston School and Thomas of Becket. There will be an additional 20 places in Northampton School for Girls and an additional 60 places will be hosted in Northampton International Academy.

The Council accepts that creating more school places in this way is not good value for money and will not create the best environment for all the places. Northampton International School will go from being a ten form entry (ten classes 28-30 of new students coming into the school every year) to an eyewatering 12 form entry school.

Of course, the need for additional places in Northampton has been predicted for over five years. It is generally accepted that the town requires an additional two secondary schools. However, because the decisions were not taken at the right time in the last few years, the Council is having to take this expensive and poor solution. This is all the more critical since the council has only just got it’s finances under control after effectively declaring itself bankrupt twice last year.

So who’s fault is it? What Education portfolio holder failed to ensure the very basic issue of enough school places in Northampton was addressed an action which is a statutory requirement for the Council?

Would it be a surprise to find out the Councillor who failed to act to ensure that there were enough places for every child to be educated in the town is the Councillor who is now leading the Council.

As Councillors are no longer allowed to speak in Cabinet meeting unless appointed by their group, I submitted a question about the failure to consult over the Equality Impact Assessment that is meant to inform the decision. You can find the question and response (which doesn’t seem to address the question) here.

It seems incredible that such a serious decision affecting so many schools all of which are independent of the council can be taken without any consultation on the impact of equality. Over the last few years there has been the promotion of the myth that the paucity of school places is as a result of immigration. This is a clear illustration that the paucity of school places is as a result of poor management of public services and poor policy making.

Human Rights and Equality Disappointments - The need to get off our knees

Finding myself at this time of year unusually outside the space of electoral politics, I have had time to focus a little harder on the other things around me. This afternoon the shocking revelation of the failure of the criminal justice system to obtain a single conviction for sixty people living in Kettering being kept in near slavery-like conditions leaves many of us with all too many questions. Many of these people were trafficked from their homes. Speaking earlier on in the year to a police officer involved in the investigation, it seems it was through investigating the theft of charity bags in the with second hand clothing that had alerted the police to the conditions that these workers were living and working in appalling physical abuse, threats and harassment. More than 20 of the workers were crammed into a three-bedroom terraced house with a single toilet that did not work.
This situation continued for four years with no one coming forward to the police or to report the situation to any other agency. There are various parties that share the blame for this including the Gang Master Licensing Authority that issued the license to the employers, the multi-million pound supermarkets that bought the produce. It is situations like this that highlight the real need for advice that reaches the individuals in greatest need. However, with drastic reforms and cuts to legal advice, one can’t help feeling that things are just going to get worse. Check out the campaigns on this here and here. This all comes together with the Government Equality Office releasing a consultation paper earlier this month, clearly stating that they wish the Equality and Human Rights Commission to cease funding their legal grants programme from 2012. They seem to think that this in the future could be funded by legal aid regardless of the fact that legal aid will not fund tribunal representation. With respondents generally only really motivated to settle cases as the tribunal date approaches, any respondent that is aware that the claimant in their case is supported by legal aid is likely to play hard ball to the end, increasing the number of tribunals that taken place and increase in the costs of justice for all of us. Perhaps the icing on the cake was the newly released proposals for equality regulations. These have been re-issues after initially being issued at the start of the year (hummm ... like that did take more resources at a time when I thought we are all mean to be tightening our belts) and significantly waters down the obligations on public bodies to demonstrate that they are doing all they can to elimination discrimination, promote equality of opportunity and promote good relations and just to make sure that we are on a generally uphill struggle the Equality and Human Rights Commission is having 55% of its budget cut. In such circumstances it is all too easy to not fight back when it comes to the bad news. However with decisions being changed nationally and locally all the time with the right kind of pressure at the right time, it’s all the more reason to hope and make ourselves heard. Join me and fight against the EHRC cuts by signing this.

Cuts and the recession

The cuts are the big news at the minute with the reality of what will go finally emerging. In the County and the the Borough.

This is the first set of budgets that I have seen that have clear evidence that there has a least been an attempt to equality impact assess either through referencing in reports or through full publication like the County Council. However, these documents have clearly been carried out in some haste with some having completely inadequate data sets to inform them. Some of them are very poor pieces of work with others not recognising the leverage that small amounts of investment can have particularly in the voluntary and community sector. Investment of a few thousand for the County Council can assist levering in tens, even hundreds of thousands from other sources for some organisations in this sector. All this at a time when there is in addition to these local cuts decisions, national cuts decisions that are a complete assault on the vulnerable in our communities. This is a must see for all. The disabled women presenting in the film highlights the focus from some in the voluntary and community sector "picking the carcass of the welfare state". It is reference to the hours, often days of time trying to apply for a plethora tenders and contracts to see some future after 31st March rather than putting the kind of energy that is needed to challenge the cuts. All too true. The cuts locally are difficult to see as much of them are hidden in debris of enormity of the cuts. For instance, in the £2,772,000 cut known as SC016 the complete axing of all advice work in the County lies. This will in particular hit Cleggs alarm clock Britain. It is those who have always worked for a living who perhaps now find themselves in hard times through redundancy, ill-heath or bereavement that will feel this the most as the services that have previously guided these people in need through an unfamiliar and complex welfare system disappear.

The recession and the cuts that exacerbate them are about inequality. Figures released last week show only one in five under 24 year olds are in work with an increasing proportion never having experienced work in the last two years. Over 50% of Black under 24 year olds unemployed, our nation is failing an entire generation. Since the Fawcett Society's attempted challenge on the governments budget the case for the gender equality implictions of the cut carries on growing.

So what is the answer? the only one that I can think of is about resistance. There are many ways of doing this, talking planning objecting but overall making the job of implementing cuts as hard as possible. The demonstration on 26th March should be a highlight of the campaign. Why don't you commit to going along too.

Unlikely bed fellows

Apologies for the lack of posting but life has been busy of late. With the local BNP standing in two by-elections over the next few weeks (Daventry District Drayton Ward) and Kettering Borough Northfield Ward) there has been a lot to be keeping up with.

It was intriguing to find that the Northants Patriot blog had started trying to earn revenue with a Google ad's stream, particularly when one ad related to equality diversity training and another related to bespoke consultancy for equalities work in local government. Seems like exactly the kind of stuff that the blog seemed to spend it's time criticising as 'a waste of money and why don't these people get real jobs rather than using my council tax for something that might be more useful instead' rant. I do wonder what the companies listed would think if they knew the exposure that they were getting.

This all co-incided with the shift in government direction to include far right extremism as part of the prevention of violent extremism agenda. It's been a long time coming but at least it's there now. The recent graffiti attack on the Ramgaria Centre on Craven Street in Northampton which included the National Front emblem is clear evidence of why work in this area is so important.

Northampton Borough Council Meeting

Quite a while since I've been to one of these.

I believe that this was the first meeting that members of the public had submitted questions during the "questions" item on the agenda.

It was quite a surprise to see the shambles that a Council meeting could descend into. Members of the public had not been given answers by portfolio holders despite protestations to the contrary and the Council had to allow time during the meeting for members of the public to read through answers (some of these stretched to over a page), all utilising precious minutes of the half hour allotted to this agenda item.

It also seemed that as a lowly member of the general public, I had been cast in the role of "el diablo" in not only questions that I submitted but also questions that other members of the public had submitted.

In one question about support for people with disabilities in their own homes, despite a member of the general public requesting me to raise this issue in Council, I was accused of trying to make political capital on the situation. Of course it would have nothing to do with the inactivity of the existing Borough Councillors for the area. The Borough Council portfolio holder sees the real problems as caused by previous administrations. Nearly, eighteen months following the current adminstration coming to power that excuse doesn't quite wash.

I raised a question about equality impact assessments by the Borough Council with the case law emerging from the High Court from Lord Justice Moses over the summer. Despite the admission that equality impact assessments in grant aid decisions were not taken before the decisions had been made (and thus decisions being made outside of the law) the administration did not seem to want to champion the cause of justice or even the legal way of doing business.

In the question by Kathy Smith about the rent charges to the Thorplands Brook Community Co-op and the Kings Heath Need"Know shop, despite proclaiming this as a Lib Dem victory in a "Focus" before the 2007 Borough elections, the Borough administration have painted this as a rash and potentially destabilishing attempt by little old me (presumably me and me alone - no mention of the other councillors who voted in favour of it) to throw the Borough budget off course. It seems that the Lib Dems are quite ashamed of their part in the two community spaces getting 2007/8 as rent free. They still don't seem to answer the question as to why in 2008/9 the two community spaces received information in August of this year that they would be expected to pay £15,000 rent for the spaces. Must be neighbourhood renewal the Lib Dem way.

Quite intrigingly, at various points in the meeting I was referred to as Councillor Roy. I did ask for the allowance but perhaps with the debate on the increase in allowances later on in the meeting, they might have decided that it was a bridge too far given the £7.2 deficit.

Lib Dem Portfolio holder, Sally Beardsworth suggested that I might be PPC (I'm going to really glad when we can actually tell people who gets that badge of honour) before being corrected.