The Overview and Scrutiny Committee of Tower Hamlets Council met on Monday 21 September 2020 to review the council's response to COVID-19, discuss the annual report and scrutiny feedback survey, and examine pre-decision scrutiny questions. Key discussions included the financial impact of the pandemic on council services, particularly in adult social care and children's services, and the effectiveness of the council's scrutiny function.

Review of Tower Hamlets Council's Response to COVID-19

The committee discussed the Overview and Screening Committee's comprehensive review of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets' response to COVID-19. This report, a culmination of six months of work, highlighted two key areas for improvement: support for market traders and the provision of hot meals for vulnerable residents.

Regarding market traders, Councillor Marc Francis raised concerns that the initial payment of £720 was insufficient compared to other London boroughs. While officers indicated that additional payments had been made, bringing the total for full-time traders to £1,440, Councillor Francis and Councillor Gabriela Salva Macallan stressed the need for clarity on the review and appeal process for businesses not paying rates. They also emphasised that future support should be equitable and timely, rather than provided in instalments.

The provision of hot meals for vulnerable residents, particularly in light of the previous year's discontinuation of the Meals on Wheels service, was also a significant point of discussion. Councillor Francis highlighted a case in Poplar where a vulnerable constituent, supported by the community group Neighbours in Poplar, had a fall and was without adequate support, underscoring the importance of such services. Councillor Salva Macallan agreed, advocating for strengthening the report's recommendations on adult hot meals and council-delivered meals for those in need. The committee agreed to revisit and strengthen Recommendation 8, focusing on meal delivery, business grants, and the voucher scheme.

The committee also discussed the need to continuously monitor the progress of the report's recommendations, with Councillor Bex White suggesting a dedicated section in each meeting to track progress. Councillor Salva Macallan supported this, emphasizing the importance of evidence-based recommendations and the report's strength in examining issues across multiple services.

Annual Report and Scrutiny Feedback Survey

The committee reviewed the annual report, noting that its preparation had been delayed due to the pandemic. Councillor Salva Macallan proposed an amendment to the report regarding the SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) deep dive, requesting further financial budget information. Councillor Bex White highlighted an upcoming session on how the council designs behaviour change programmes, using recycling as a focus, and encouraged broader participation.

The findings of a scrutiny feedback survey were presented by Afazul Hoque, Head of Strategy and Policy. The survey, sent to councillors and co-opted members, revealed that while the COVID-19 response and engagement with residents were seen as strengths, areas for improvement included the volume of spotlight sessions, the visibility of scrutiny's work, and the responsiveness of the executive to scrutiny's recommendations. Suggestions for the future included more spotlight sessions for young people, better promotion of scrutiny meetings, and earlier engagement in policy development. Councillor Marc Francis echoed concerns about the executive's responsiveness and highlighted the ongoing issue of channel shift and the difficulties some residents face with digital services.

Pre-Decision Scrutiny Questions for the Cabinet

The committee discussed pre-decision scrutiny questions to be raised with the cabinet. Councillor Marc Francis raised concerns about changes to housing allocations, particularly the removal of band 3 which he argued was intended to help younger residents secure housing but was disproportionately benefiting those needing sheltered accommodation. Councillor Gabriela Salva Macallan supported this, questioning the rationale behind removing band 3 despite strong consultation responses against it and highlighting the potential impact on how the council responds to housing register applications. Councillor Francis also raised questions about the capital delivery programme and the annual performance report, suggesting that performance delivery needed to be a focus for the next year's work programme.

Budget Delivery Concerns in Children's and Adults' Health Directorates

The committee examined budget delivery concerns within the Children's and Adults' Health directorates. Councillor Danny Hassell, Cabinet Member for Children's Services, explained that while there had been significant overspends, particularly in children's social care, the situation had improved due to unachievable savings being removed, additional investment in placements and staffing, and a concerted effort in staff recruitment. He noted that new COVID-related pressures included direct payments for respite care and support for vulnerable families.

James Thomas, Corporate Director for Children's and Culture, elaborated on the volatility of some budgets, citing the SEND transport budget as an example. Christine McInnes, Divisional Director for Education, addressed a loss of income from school SLAs, attributing it primarily to COVID-19 and the timing of school closures.

Denise Radley, along with Councillor Rachel Blake, Lead Member for Adults Health and Wellbeing, presented on the overspend in Adult Social Care and Integrated Commissioning, largely driven by the cost of care packages for an ageing population and increasing complexity of need. They outlined a recovery plan focusing on expenditure controls, reviewing care packages, and addressing high-cost packages through reablement and rehabilitation. Challenges included data reporting issues due to a new client recording system, Mosaic, and the ongoing impact of COVID-19.

Councillor Andrew Wood questioned the public health department's ability to break even during a pandemic and sought evidence on the cumulative impact of COVID-19 on mental health rates. Denise Radley explained that COVID-related expenditure was accounted for separately and that public health had reprioritized its resources. She acknowledged that while data did not yet show a definitive increase in mental health cases, there was a general sense of increased anxiety and depression within the community.

The committee also discussed the impact of restructuring, the need for equalities impact assessments, and the potential financial implications of Tower Awards. Concerns were raised about the scale and complexity of budget pressures in frontline services and the importance of distinguishing between COVID-related pressures and pre-existing budget delivery problems.