Minutes for Children & Young People Scrutiny Commission meeting, Jan 4 2010, 7.00PM official page

Cllr Khan, Cllr Taylor, Ralph Bergmann and Vera Edwards.

There were no urgent items and the order was as laid out.

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the 7^th December meeting were AGREED as an accurate account.

AGREED

The minutes from 7^th December were agreed.

There were no updates.

A summary of the pilot project held as part of the review at City Academy on 7^th December. 

The Chair explained to the Commission that as discussed and agreed at the November meeting, the Commission ran a pilot project as part of the Raising Aspirations Review at City Academy on 7^th December. 

Cllr Taylor briefly talked about the pilot project at the December meeting and it was agreed that a full written report would be included for the Commission’s information. 

The Chair asked Members to note the written report of the pilot project and invited any comments about the pilot project.

Lisa Neidichreferred to the feedback from the students involved in the pilot, and commented that it was sad that the young people involved in the project at City Academy felt they needed to be shown positive examples of people that had come from Hackney, and that it shows how much projects like this are needed. 

The Scrutiny Officer, Gareth Wall, explained that one of the questions in the feedback forms was worded around whether it was important for guest speakers to have been educated in or grown up in Hackney so there was a specific question around this issue.

Saleh Ahmed said that he found the report of the pilot project interesting, and he thought the guest speakers involved were representative of some of the communities in Hackney.  He supported Recommendation 4 in the Raising Aspirations report about extending the pilot project.

The Chair commented that it was important that young people in Hackney could relate to people working in big companies, such as KPMG, but it would be more useful if the people coming to speak to students from these companies were from Hackney so young people could find out more about the route they had taken to get where they are.

Cllr Krishna said that the pilot project was interesting but asked how the criteria of ‘from Hackney’ for the guest speakers was defined.

The Chair replied that the guest speakers should have been educated and grown up in Hackney, and it was also agreed following the pilot session, that the speakers should be in their twenties or early thirties so that the students can better relate to them. 

The Chair pointed Members to pages 67-68 of the agenda and the suggestions for improvement to future sessions, such as the age range of the guest speakers, and the fact they should have been educated in Hackney. 

Discussion amongst Commission members about the draft Raising Aspirations report.

The Chair explained that there had been four evidence-gathering meetings as part of the Raising Aspirations review, as well as site visits and the research carried out by Hackney Youth Parliament.  Evidence collected over this period had been collated into the draft Raising Aspirations scrutiny report, and recommendations had been made according to the evidence heard. 

The Chair told Members that a meeting had been held with the Corporate Director for Children’s Services, Alan Wood, the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, Cllr Krishna, and other senior officers from the Learning Trust to discuss the draft recommendations.

The Chair invited the Commission to comment on the recommendations and report.

The Chair asked Commission members for their agreement regarding each recommendation individually. 

Recommendation One was agreed with no changes.

Recommendation Two was agreed with no changes.

Recommendation Three was agreed with the following changes:

Mary Ludlow expressed concern about the Connexions service, and cited the evidence from the Hackney Youth Parliament at the December meeting. 

The Chair replied that the Commission heard from the Connexions service at the last meeting about how schools were not taking up their full entitlement to the Connexions service and using the service effectively.

Mary Ludlow replied that many schools have not found the Connexions service effective and so there were problems on both sides.  She suggested that Recommendation 3 should include that Connexions should report back to the Commission on progress as well as the Learning Trust.

Cllr Krishna agreed with Mrs Ludlow that Connexions and the schools (through the Learning Trust) should report back to the Commission on Recommendation 3.

The Chair agreed and asked for this to be included in this recommendation.

Recommendation Four was agreed with no changes.

Cllr Krishna suggested it might be useful for the Commission to request a presentation from the Learning Trust on the transfer of the Learning and Skills Council’s responsibilities to local authorities this year, and the plans in place for this in Hackney. 

Lisa Neidichagreed with Cllr Krishna’s suggestion and said it would be very useful. 

Cllr Siddiqui commented that most of the recommendations were related to the Learning Trust, and expressed concern that it was not clear when they were expected to report back on progress against the recommendations to the Commission.

The Chair replied that it was made clear at the top of Page 5 of the report (Page 37 of the agenda) that a report updating the Commission on all of the recommendations was expected in September 2010. 

Lisa Neidich said that there were time limits included in some of the recommendations but not others, she suggested that this should be consistent and all of the recommendations should included a time limit for reporting progress back to the Commission. 

The Chair agreed that the wording of the recommendations should be changed to reflect this.

Cllr Siddiqui also asked why Page 8 of the report (Page 40 of the agenda) stated that financial and legal comments are pending.  He said that there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Discussion about the draft terms of reference for the Commission’s next scrutiny review.

The Chair explained to Commission Members that the Youth Provision review will be a short review and will run from January to March 2010.  This will involve evidence-gathering at Commission meetings, site visits to view examples of good practice and engagement with interested community groups. 

The Chair asked members to comment on the draft terms of reference for the Youth Provision scrutiny review.

Cllr Plouviez asked if there will be a Value for Money section of the Youth Provision review.

The Chair replied that this was not currently included in the draft terms of reference and asked the Commission if this should be included. 

The Scrutiny Officer, Gareth Wall, explained that the Governance and Resources Scrutiny Commission is currently looking at approaches to Value for Money across the council, and has recently received a report from the Children and Young People Directorate about the return on investment in youth services. 

The Commission agreed that Value for Money should be added to the terms of reference. 

The Chair highlighted Question 1 in the Core Questions of the draft terms of reference: ‘What youth provisions are currently in place within the borough?’.  She emphasised that the review would not just be looking at services provided by the council, but also other services provided in Hackney, such as scout groups. 

Lisa Neidichagreed and stated that it was also important to look at youth provisions provided by religious organisations, such as those in the Orthodox Jewish community.

The Chair emphasised that this will be a short review with only two formal meetings and asked Commission members for suggestions for site visits and organisations or people to approach to speak to related to the review. 

Cllr Krishna suggested it would be helpful for the review for the Commission to receive a presentation from a youth worker about youth work.  She suggested the Head of Youth Services should be invited to present to the Commission, accompanied by a few youth workers.

Lisa Neidichagreed with Cllr Krishna and suggested the youth worker who accompanied the Hackney Youth Parliament members at the December meeting, Cat Garrett, might be a good person to talk to the Commission about youth work.

Saleh Ahmedcommented that it would be interesting to look further into the people who deliver youth services, and the type of people doing youth work and their backgrounds and qualifications. 

Cllr Plouviez commented that this is too much for only two meetings, it is important to know the range of youth provision but the review needs to be focussed as it is only a short review. 

Lisa Neidichsuggested Members should spend an afternoon or evening doing site visits, similar to the afternoon of 6 site visits for the Early Years review.

Cllr Icoz suggested it would be useful to visit youth clubs, such as The Crib, in Hackney to talk to young people about youth provisions in the borough.

Cllr Krishna said she could provide a list of youth provisions in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Lisa Neidichrepeated her support for a presentation from the Learning Trust about the services that will be taken over from the Learning and Skills Council in 2010.

The Chair asked if the Commission would like a written report or a presentation at the meeting.

Lisa Neidichreplied that both should be requested from the Learning Trust.

ACTION

Scrutiny Officer to contact the Learning Trust to request a written report and a presentation at the February meeting on 14-19 provision and work being undertaken for the transfer of services from the Learning and Skills Council.