Agenda item

To consider the recommendations made by Cabinet since the last ordinary Council meeting relating to the following matters:

 

              i.        Developing Croydon’s new Community Safety Strategy;

            ii.        The Croydon Renewal Improvement Plan and the Croydon Renewal Improvement Board;

           iii.        The Croydon Renewal Financial Recovery Plan and Submission to MHCLG for the Capitalisation Direction; and

           iv.        Strategic Review of Companies and other investment arrangements – Brick by Brick Croydon Ltd (“BBB”) Shareholder decision – Directors and articles of association

Madam Mayor informed Council that she had received a request for all of the recommendations contained within the report be referred for debate. Following consultation with both Groups it had been agreed that the three sets of recommendations would be considered individually with three speakers from each Group speaking for up to three minutes each.

 

The Croydon Renewal Improvement Plan and the Croydon Renewal Improvement Board

And

The Croydon Renewal Financial Recovery Plan and Submission to MHCLG for the Capitalisation Direction

 

In moving the recommendations contained in the report, Councillor King noted that the report were perhaps the most important to be presented to Council in recent years. There was considerable detail in report in relation to organisational, financial and managerial challenges faced by the council and it categorises the actions and inactions which had contributed to the weakened financial position.

 

Councillor King stated the report recommended the development of a Croydon Renewal Plan and the establishment of an independent chaired Improvement Board. It was noted that all of the improvement proposals were framed around different areas of work and would include new priorities, ways of work, improved governance, management and leadership practice. Service improvements were planned to better manage demand and costs.

 

Council were informed by Councillor King that a review of the Member and officer Code of Conduct was planned.  This would fully embed the Nolan principles in all of the council’s work. It was recognised that the financial gap for the following year remained significant with over £30million of savings identified and more required in addition to a successful submission to MHCLG for a capitalisation direction.

 

Councillor King concluded that the scale and nature of the challenge was unprecedented but that he was confident that with the new Leader and Interim Chief Executive leading the way in delivering the plan that Croydon would be efficient, effective and financially stable going forward.

 

Councillor Young seconded the recommendations and reserved his right to speak.

 

Councillor Jason Cummings noted that the use of the word ‘renewal’ meant that something had fallen into disrepair or had failed and that this word represented the current state of Croydon. It was stated that the Plan set for departmental budgets to increase by £105 million to offset budgets which had previously been under forecast; as such there would be no additional services but a promise of an accurate budget only.

 

Councillor Cummings stated that when the savings of £41 million were applied there remained a budget gap of £64 million which had to be breached by savings; which it was stated, would be felt by residents as cuts.

 

It was stated by Councillor Cummings that his response was not in relation to the content as he recognised that a number of officers had put in a large amount of work into developing the Plan but rather his concerns were in relation to the delivery. Councillor Cummings noted that the Leader and Deputy Leader had been members of the Cabinet which had overseen the issues. Additionally, the chairs of the General Purposes and Audit Committee (GPAC) and Scrutiny and Overview Committee remained in post. It was suggested that having listened to the Leader being interviewed on BBC London Radio that evasion of answering questions which, in Councillor Cummings opinion was a tactic used by the previous Leader, would continue and as such Councillor Cummings did not trust the delivery of the Plan. Councillor Cummings concluded that he felt Croydon deserved better and so he was unable to support Labour’s plan for renewal.

 

Councillor Millson stated that impossible promises started with farfetched resolutions which then became dogma code which ignored the needs of residents and that, in his opinion, this had happened with the Labour administration in Croydon. It was stated that promises were made that revenue would flow from home builder which had failed to build houses and from a hotel that has had to close, and that social care budgets which had repeatedly overspent would suddenly become balanced.

 

The issues listed by Councillor Millson would continue, he felt, under the Croydon Renewal Plan. He reported that queues were already an hour long at the Factory Lane recycling site and raised concerns that with the proposal to close a centre and the end of the free bulky waste collection there would be a dramatic increase in fly tipping. Concerns were further raised that residents would be impacted by library closures but that the most painful cuts would be felt by the most vulnerable adults and children in the borough. Councillor Millson stated that the cuts represented the human cost of what he felt were the impossible promises of the Labour Administration.

 

Councillor Millson stated residents knew that the promises had led to the council’s financial position but he reported that they could not comprehend why those at fault were still councillors and claiming allowances. He stressed that he felt that the only way those at fault would pay would be with the election of a Conservative Administration in 2022.

 

It was noted by Councillor Campbell that Croydon’s social care spend was high in comparison to other boroughs and that the structural deficit had not been addressed in a timely manner which had led to significant overspends. Adequate tracking and monitoring of spend by officers and Members had not been in place which Councillor Campbell stressed was unacceptable. With those issues in mind, Councillor Campbell welcomed the appointment of Rachel Soni as the Interim Director of Commissioning & Procurement as she had a solid understanding of health and social care and her contribution to radical change was reported to be apparent.

 

Councillor Campbell stressed her commitment to meeting the needs of residents and ensuring that statutory duties of the council were delivered. The focus of the council, it was stated, was to ensure there was a budget in place which funded existing needs and to enable this to be met there would be a reduction in expenditure of 5% within adult social care.

 

Councillor Campbell concluded that the strength of the Plan would be the Administration’s commitment to delivering it and effectively utilising scrutiny, monitoring facilities and challenge from the Improvement Board. She stressed she was confident the plan would be delivered and would be successful.

 

Councillor Perry stated that he felt that Labour in Croydon had squandered the future of the borough due to its incompetence and financial mismanagement which had seen debt rise to £1.5 billion. He used the analogy that the council had been playing a game of Monopoly by starting a company to build houses and investing in shopping centres and hotels.

 

Concerns were raised by Councillor Perry that the Plan represented the reduction of services which residents relied on and that the impact would be felt worst disproportionately by the most vulnerable residents in the borough. Councillor Perry noted that the use of the word ‘renewal’ represented a fresh start but that with 70% of the Cabinet remaining there would be no fresh start in his opinion.

 

Councillor Perry stated that he felt that the Plan constituted cuts rather than savings, with closures of libraries, HRRC’s and cuts to social care budgets and voluntary sector budgets. Concerns were raised that the changes discussed at the meeting were only the start to changes that were to take place.

 

It was noted that the Leader had earlier highlighted that the council had a controllable budget of £300 million, which Councillor Perry argued that the Administration had demonstrated a lack of management of and continued to be in denial as to the role they had played in the council’s financial position. As such, Councillor Perry concluded that he felt that Labour were unable to deliver the renewal plan and that the Opposition would not support Labour’s failure to deliver.

 

Councillor Young in seconding the motion to approve the recommendations highlighted the aspects of the Plan, including; the financial recovery plan, the submission to MHCLG for a capitalisation direction and an independently chaired Improvement Board which would provide assurances to all stakeholders that the changes required would be made. In light of what the Plan sought to achieve, Councillor Young questioned why the Opposition would speak against it.

 

Furthermore Councillor Young questioned why the Opposition spoke against a plan to address the council’s financial shortcomings which had been highlighted in the RIPI.  The report had criticised the resilience of the council and had raised concerns of the role of Members. Councillor Young stated that the council sought to draft a submission to MHCLG for a capitalisation direction to request the funding Croydon required to balance its budget, which the Opposition did not support.

 

Concerns were raised by Councillor Young that the Opposition had also spoken against the formation of an independently chaired Improvement Board.  Councillor Young explained that this was integral to the delivery and success of the Plan. In response to concerns that the Administration was unable to deliver the Plan, Councillor Young stated that in his opinion no evidence had been provide to back up the claim.

 

Councillor Young concluded that he felt the Opposition should step up and support Croydon by supporting the Plan to enable the council to rectify the situation.  Councillor Young called on all Members to support it no matter which Party they were from.

 

The motion to approve the recommendations as set out in the report was put to the vote and carried.

 

Strategic Review of Companies and other investment arrangements Brick by Brick Croydon Ltd (“BBB”) Shareholder decision – Directors and articles of association

 

In moving the recommendations contained in the report, Councillor Hamida Ali noted that Council had met on 19 November 2020 to consider the response to the RIPI. At that meeting the auditor’s had stressed that the issues contained within their report were systemic and included all Members of Council. Councillor Hamida Ali felt that the Opposition were choosing to distance themselves from taking part in the improvement journey.

 

Councillor Hamida Ali noted that the RIPI had raised concerns in relation to the council’s wholly owned subsidies and recommended a review of the company structures to ensure the council was fully exercising its responsibilities in the council’s and public’s interest. In response to this, Councillor Hamida Ali noted that a review had been commissioned from PwC and the report of that review was before Council for consideration. The review, had looked at each of the companies; Brick by Brick, the Growth Zone, Croydon Affordable Homes, the Revolving Investment Fund and the Asset Investment Fund; and recommended strengthening governance in all areas.

 

Councillor Hamida Ali noted that the recommendations before Council related to three areas; drawing up an action plan to respond to the recommendations, commissioning further work from PwC to inform the council of the options available to it in relation to Brick by Brick and asserting the council’s role as sole shareholder by amending the Articles of Association to ensure it had access to information and Board vacancies were filled.

 

Councillor Hamida Ali informed council that the recommendations contained within the PwC report were accepted by the Administration and  in response to the report an important action plan would be drawn up which would inform the council’s Improvement Plan. This would form part of the submission to MHCLG for a capitalisation direction and any further recommendations from the additional work commissioned would inform future decisions which would protect the council’s and public’s investment.

 

Councillor Hamida Ali concluded that she hoped the Opposition would demonstrate commitment to corporate improvement and would support the recommendations contained within the report.

 

Councillor Avis seconded the recommendations and reserved her right to speak.

 

Councillor Bains stated that, in his opinion, everyone in Croydon considered the Labour Group to be a joke with investments in a hotel which had gone bankrupt and paying grants to controversial art projects. Councillor Bains stated that in his opinion the interview the Leader had given on BBC Radio London had been embarrassing and had shown that she was out of her depth.

 

It was stated, that in Councillor Bains opinion that the actions of the Labour Administration had been a tragedy of the largest proportions and that Brick by Brick had been the biggest scandal. Councillor Bains suggested Labour had deliberately created a private company so as to avoid public scrutiny. Furthermore, Councillor Bains accused the Chair of Scrutiny & Overview Committee of being more concerned in remaining in his role than ensuring effective scrutiny took place.

 

Concerns were raised by Councillor Bains that in addition to forming Brick by Brick the council had formed several sub-companies and charities which, he stated, had not undertaken any charitable work.

 

Councillor Bains concluded that he felt the Labour group had failed on every level and were more concerned with internal politics than improvement and suggested that they should all resign immediately for the future of Croydon.

 

Councillor Mohan questioned how the council had come into financial difficulty and suggested the reason was outdated left wing ideology. The Westfield project, which he stated was ready to be delivered in partnership with the private sector in 2014, had failed in his belief due to Labour being ideologically opposed to the scheme. This, he stated, had cost millions of pounds in lost council tax. The revenue it was stated would’ve helped the council’s financial long term stability.

 

Councillor Mohan further stated that Brick by Brick had been set up due to, in his opinion, Labour being opposed to Right to Buy.  Due to that opposition, Councillor Mohan suggested Labour had established a complex company which had significantly contributed to the council’s financial position.

 

It was suggested by Councillor Mohan that Labour had always believed that taxpayers money was their own and that they could borrow and spend without consequences and that it was that mentality which had led to the current situation. Councillor Mohan concluded that the only option for Croydon was for the Administration to change following the Local Elections in 2022.

 

Due to technical difficulties Madam Mayor moved to the next speaker and called Councillor Canning to speak when he was able to access the meeting.

 

Concerns were raised by Councillor Hale that the PwC report detailed a wide range of governance by the council in its relationship with Brick by Brick and Croydon Affordable Homes. It was stated that there had been an absence of adequate financial systems and processes which meant that the accuracy of the Brick by Brick financial information could not be trusted. The council’s relationship with Brick by Brick was typified with expired loans and money not being paid back by the company. Councillor Hale raised further concerns that it appeared that the directors of Brick by Brick were only now required to have a strong background in finance due to the mistakes that had already cost the council over £200 million.

 

Councillor Hale noted that the Opposition had been raising concerns in relation to Brick by Brick for a number of years and stated the Administration had only just begun to understand the issues. Concerns were raised by Councillor Hale, that much loved green spaces had been sold to the company for £1 and planning applications were fast tracked which had caused a lot of anger for residents. Furthermore, a £16 million loan to Brick by Brick to refurbish Fairfield Halls, when the budget for the works was £13 million, was noted by Councillor Hale. In light of the concerns raised Councillor Hale stressed that no further applications or developments should be started.

 

Councillor Hale stated that the councillors she felt were responsible had remained silent and had not publically apologised for letting down the people of Croydon and officers who were concerned about the future of their jobs. In conclusion, Councillor Hale stressed that she no longer had any confidence in Labour to deliver; including the plans to rectify the situation.

 

Councillor Avis began by stating that she had not suggested that she regretted nothing, but that she had said she didn’t regret criticising the Opposition or the government for the financial situation the council found itself in. In addition, Councillor Avis questioned Councillor Bains statement that charities had been set up but had not undertaken charitable work, when the council had sought to deliver truly affordable homes for those without. In response to Councillor Mohan’s statement that Labour were ideologically driven when, in her opinion, the ideology would have been the government taking responsibility and building homes for the homeless.

 

Councillor Avis stated she was extremely proud of Croydon Affordable Homes and the LLPs which had been established with the intention to build homes as there were many without. It was quoted that 1010 children had been in emergency accommodation during the previous year and as such Councillor Avis stressed she would not apologise for building affordable homes. In response to claims that affordable homes had not been built Councillor Avis stated 86 homes had been built in the first tranche and in second tranche there would be 250 homes with a further 90 in the pipeline.

 

In conclusion, Councillor Avis stated that she regretted the financial position the council was in but asked Members to remember why the council had got into that position and their responsibility for the position also.

 

Councillor Canning noted that Brick by Brick had been established with the best of intentions, however the PwC report had found there was inadequate governance in place and the company had been allowed to underperform. It was stated by Councillor Canning that this had contributed to the council having to issue a Section 114 Notice with over £200 million loaned to the company. However Councillor Canning noted that the council should not forget that corporate debt was already around £1 billion in 2014 when the Labour Administration began.

 

It was recognised by Councillor Canning that the company had not built the number of new homes it was supposed to and the reason identified by PwC was that the land being built on was often unsuitable for development. It was stated by Councillor Canning that he could understand why some had described Brick by Brick as little more than a Ponzi scheme when taking into consideration the lack of interest being paid or any large payments to the council.

 

Despite those issues, Councillor Canning stated that the new leadership would look to rectify those mistakes and that began with agreeing the recommendations contained within the report. It was essential, Councillor Canning stressed, that there was robust financial oversight of the company and the proposed changes to the Board was one step towards better management of the company.

 

Councillor Canning welcomed that, whilst work continued on understanding the best value option in terms of the future of the company, development on new sites paused. Councillor Canning concluded that he was sure that all Members were keen to see the outcome of the PwC report in the New Year.

 

The motion to approve the recommendations as set out in the report was put to the vote and carried.

 

Developing Croydon’s new Community Safety Strategy

 

Councillor Wood noted that a new Community Safety Strategy had been due to be considered by Council in autumn 2020, however the situation had changed dramatically since work began on the development of the strategy. The new strategy was to be underpinned by the council’s public health approach to tackling violence. Effective engagement with residents and those who had experienced violence had been agreed by the Safer Croydon Partnership in January 2020 and had been discussed at scrutiny in February 2020.

 

However, with the advent of covid-19 Councillor Wood stated it had been sensible to rethink the development of the strategy and as such, Council were informed that a new strategy would be brought for approval in 2021. Councillor Wood stressed that whilst a new strategy had not been fully developed, work had continued to keep communities safe. Funding had been secured from Mayor’s Office of Policing and Crime (MOPAC) for the Violence Reduction Network in 2021/22 and a further £370,000 had been invested by MOPAC into the Family Justice Centre.

 

Furthermore, Councillor Wood noted that it had been important to reconsider the strategy in light of issues which had come to the forefront due to lockdown; such as a rise in domestic violence within the borough. Additionally, increased levels of disputes between neighbours had been seen and these changes would inform the new strategy.

 

Councillor Wood concluded that whilst the new strategy was being developed data would be collected to ensure the council could protect its community. The new strategy, it was stated, would be agile and fit for purpose following development with all stakeholders.

 

Councillor Patsy Cummings seconded the recommendations and reserved her right to speak.

 

Councillor Stranack noted that much of the meeting had focussed on challenges facing the town’s finances but that the report, he felt, highlighted Labour’s policy failings also. Since Labour took control in 2014, Councillor Stranack reported crime levels had been on the increase which was in stark contrast the decreasing levels before that. Violent crimes had risen by 64%, vehicle crime had increased by 42% and public order offences had risen by 135%.

 

Two strategies had been produced by Labour and Councillor Stranack noted that the key aim of the strategy had been how the council alongside key stakeholders would reduce crime. In light of the figures Councillor Stranack had reported he stated that it was clear that the strategies had failed. In addition to increasing levels of crime, Councillor Stranack stated residents felt less safe.

 

It was noted that the council had a statutory responsibility to publish a strategy. In Councillor Stranack’s opinion, the council had a problem as a new strategy would highlight the failure of the previous strategy to tackle crime in Croydon. Concerns were raised by the councillor that the report stated a new strategy would not be published until 2022 and that until that time a failed strategy would be extended. Councillor Stranack highlighted Section Six of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 which required authorities to formulate and implement a strategy for the reduction of crime and stated that he felt that by extending the current strategy the council would be breaking the law in relation to its statutory duties.

 

It was noted by Councillor Bennett that the paper presented to Cabinet in October 2020 was when Councillor Hamida Ali had been the responsible Cabinet Member and was 155 pages long. Concerns were raised that the 2017-2020 Strategy had been a poor copy and paste job of the 2014-17 Strategy and was awash with acronyms, flowcharts and spreadsheets.

 

Councillor Bennett noted the strategy was written to address the issue of crime within the borough but stated that the report included appalling figures.  Councillor Bennett stated that the strategy represented real people impacted by crime in the borough.

 

Concerns were raised that the preamble in the strategy claimed that good progress had been made while on page 5 of the strategy it states that Croydon had the highest number of rapes in London. Furthermore, Councillor Bennett stated Croydon was ranked first for violent crime, sexual abuse and domestic violence in crime. She questioned where the strategy was for supporting those female victims of domestic and sexual abuse, especially considering many of those victims would have been locked down with their abuser during the pandemic. Councillor Bennett called on Councillor Hamida Ali to step up and ensure a new strategy was developed rather than blame the pandemic for not undertaking the required community consultation. It was in Councillor Bennett’s opinion unacceptable to vote for the recommendation to extend the strategy.

 

Councillor Ben-Hassel stated she was surprised that the Opposition were opposed to the practical approach which had been proposed which would enable the development of the right Community Safety Strategy which residents deserve. Councillor Ben-Hassel recalled that a scrutiny meeting which both Councillor Stranack and Councillor Ward attended where the merits of extending the strategy were discussed by the Cabinet Member and officers. It was noted at the meeting that partners had signalled a desire to play a greater part in co-designing the strategy; which the council had listened to.

 

Councillor Ben-Hassel explained that a carefully planned extensive consultation and engagement process to co-design the strategy had been disrupted by covid-19. As such, the decision had been made to delay the consultation to enable all stakeholder to participate. It was her view the right decision, especially in light of the change in patterns of crime as a result of the pandemic.

 

It was recognised that Croydon was lucky to have a well-functioning Family Justice Centre and excellent projects which worked alongside the Centre. The Centre, it was noted, had extended its hours in response to increasing levels of need. This change in crime meant it was right, in Councillor Ben-Hassel view, to pause the development of a new strategy to allow officers to analyse the findings of how covid-19 was impacting crime and to ensure those findings informed the new strategy.

 

Whilst Councillor Ben-Hassel stated she hoped Opposition colleagues would continue to challenge the Administration, she felt that voting against a common sense approach which enabled the council to fulfil its statutory duty was incorrect. The councillor called on Opposition Members to use their influence on the Government to lobby for Croydon and to raise awareness of the worrying fall in domestic violence prosecutions. In conclusion, Councillor Ben-Hassel encourage Opposition Members to continue to engage on a cross party basis, including scrutiny, which would enable them to take part in the shaping of Croydon’s new Community Safety Strategy.

 

It was noted by Councillor Ward that the strategy was an important one as violence could have very large impacts on people’s lives and effective action was required. Councillor Ward stated the public health approach to violent crime was a good one which was science based policies and interventions backed by research. Good data was required to have an understanding on the problem and Councillor Ward stated that there was good data within the proposed extended strategy but that he had concerned that there was too much focus on data and not enough on action.

 

Councillor Ward stressed that the public health approach was centred on action, making interventions, measuring performance and trialling options to see if they made a difference and stopping those which didn’t work. It was that approach, Councillor Ward stated was what was missing from the report as he felt that after three years there was little evidence of the public health approach having been applied. He saw little quantitative data on what was and wasn’t working but rather, he stated, pages on priorities and intentions only.

 

To that end, it was stated by Councillor Ward, that the council’s performance and project management was just as bad as its financial management. He suggested that of all the targets which had been set, all but three, the council had failed to meet. Whilst he reiterated that the report was an important one he stressed that he was not confident of Labour being in charge and delivering the strategy.

 

Councillor Patsy Cummings noted that on 30 October 2017 she had made her maiden speech to Council and that on the day before Aren Mali was killed yards away from the Town Hall. During her maiden speech she recalled that she had walked over to Councillor Jason Cummings and urged him and his colleagues to put aside politics and to work on a cross-party basis to ensure such a tragedy no longer happened. It was recognised that since Aren’s death other sons and daughters had been lost but stressed that things were changing in Croydon.

 

Thanks to the public health approach, Councillor Cummings stated that partners were determined to ensure change took place for the young people in the borough. Councillor Cummings stated the strategy was proposed to be extended due to the pandemic which could not have been predicted. It was stressed by the councillor that the community did not want to hear of Councillor’s arguing about dates because what was important was the lives of young people in the borough.

 

It was noted that the previous day the Metropolitan Police Commissioner (Dame Cressida Dick DBE QPM) had acknowledged that higher proportion of black men were stopped but had stressed that no one had been targeted due to their skin colour. Councillor Cummings stated that in Croydon the police were working with all partners as the disproportionality was recognised. The answer, it was stated, was not to deny the issue but to build community trust and relationships and that work had been recognised by the Deputy Mayor of Policing and Crime (Sophie Linden). It was noted that working with community leaders had been integral to helping families and young people to change their lives. Training for new young police officers including working with community leaders and young black boys was noted by the councillor as being a means to ensure that they could police by consent.

 

Councillor Cummings concluded that despite the challenges faced in Croydon the Administration was listening to its communities and working with partners and the community to make Croydon safe.

 

The Council Solicitor was asked to speak in relation to concerns raised by councillors as to the legality of extending the strategy. Councillor’s attention was drawn to the Legal Considerations at section 7 of the report which set out the legal framework and the Constitutional framework.

 

Councillor Stranack made a Point of Order and requested clarification as to whether extending the strategy fulfilled the statutory responsibility to ensure there was a Community Safety Strategy in place. In response, the Council Solicitor confirmed that she would write to the councillor with further detail.

 

The motion to approve the recommendations as set out in the report was put to the vote and carried.