Another Call-in - Older Person's Drop-in Centres

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by matt on June 20, 2011 at 14:51

And what about the Willoughby Rd centre Karen?

 

If this is not part of the discussion (as appears) can you tell us what alternative arrangements are being discussed for people who rely on this centre?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on June 20, 2011 at 15:18

Matt, this decision would affect the Willoughby Road Centre.  Cllr David Schmitz has been leading on this one and has done a lot of work - discussions are still ongoing as to whether it is feasible it could be kept open without council funding and of course at the moment no decisions have been made.  I have asked David for an update as to where things stand now and I will post as soon I hear from him.  Of course these centres are absolutely essential for the people who use them.  They provide a place to meet with friends, interact with others in the same position, social contact, provide meals and medical services and lots of other support - their loss would be a disaster!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by matt on June 20, 2011 at 20:31

Thanks Karen, looking fwd to the update from David. Yes these centres are very important and should not close.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on June 21, 2011 at 11:06

The current situation with the Willoughby Road Drop-in Centre is that the council does not own the site and the current lease is nearing its end. Cllr Schmitz has been arguing that if the council has no further use for the site then it ought to let the people who are on the committee for the centre run it with support from Council officers. This would provide a stop-gap as they search for other premises. Another possibility is that it could eventually link up with the Woodside Centre, which is reasonably accessible by bus for those who can manage to get there under their own steam, but which could also be reached by the mobility scheme vehicle for those who cannot – though clearly this would not be ideal. Council officers are particularly keen that the service is not lost and the political leadership seems to be receptive to the idea of encouraging the committee to run the centre for a limited period during the remainder of the lease and to the idea further of assisting them with advice and support from council officers.

The chair of the committee for the centre will be invited to any meetings regarding the future of the site. This follows on a request by Cllr David Winskill to let the more knowledgeable users of the centres know that their contributions will be much welcomed in the forthcoming discussions.

A recent development, namely yesterday’s report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission that the rights of older people receiving care at home in England are being overlooked, makes the preservation of this service all the more important, as to remove it would be to remove a safety net of which there is increasing and serious need.

Cllr Schmitz and I will be liaising with local groups to find alternative premises and organisations in Harringay ward if the council upholds its decision to cease to run the centre itself.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by matt on June 21, 2011 at 12:04

Does the committee have funds at it's disposal to lease another premises, if that becomes necessary?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on June 24, 2011 at 9:38

I don't know the answer to that Matt but I will find out.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on June 27, 2011 at 16:19

Just returned from the Overview & Scrutiny Call-in meeting regarding the closure of Older People's Drop-in Centres.  The meeting was incredibly well attended with some fantastic representations.  It is clear how much great work these places do for our older residents and how highly valued they are. 

The committee decided to refer the decision back to the decision maker, the cabinet member for Adult Services in this instance and the matter will go back to cabinet for  them to reconsider the decision.  I will post the full decision of the OSC when the clerk has had a chance to prepare it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on June 28, 2011 at 17:32

Here is the decision in full:

Decision:
The Chair MOVED a motion that the decision taken by the Cabinet in relation to Drop-In Centres on 7th June was inside the Council’s policy and budget framework and that further action should be taken. This was unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED

1a. That the decision taken by the Cabinet in relation to Drop-In Centres on 7th June was inside the Council’s policy and budget Framework.

The Chair MOVED a motion that no further action should be taken and a vote was taken and unanimously rejected.

Councillor Diakides MOVED a motion that the matter be referred back to the Cabinet with a recommendation that the Cabinet defer a final decision for a further 6 months in order to allow the completion of the detailed exploration of alternatives and of possible extra support and finance, that the department was currently already working on. This was seconded by Councillor Ejiofor.

A vote was taken (8 members voted for the motion and 1 member (Cllr Weber) voted against) and carried.

Cllr Weber asked for it to be noted that her reason for voting against the motion was that she would have preferred for the decision to be referred to full Council.

RESOLVED

2a. That the decision in relation to Drop-In Centres be referred back to the Cabinet to reconsider the decision before taking a final decision within 5 working days in light of the views expressed by the Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

2b. The Cabinet be recommended to defer a final decision and continue to fund drop-in services for a further 6 months in order to allow the completion of the detailed exploration of alternatives and of possible extra support (including facilitating capacity building within the voluntary sector, to assist the voluntary sector in filling the void that the Council¹s withdrawal from Drop-in Centres will have created) and finance, that the department was currently already working on


In making this recommendation the Committee took into account evidence that:


· There was a universal perception that drop-in services were generally well run and popular; also that their proposed withdrawal, in advance of putting adequate alternatives in place, would have an immediate real impact on the quality of life of a large number of vulnerable people in the borough who were currently using them. It would also undermine the current system of preventative measures in the borough which was likely to lead to further future costs to the authority as well as avoidable distress to numerous low income residents.


· The vast majority of those affected were low income people, with significant proportions from vulnerable groups; whilst almost any reductions in Adult Services was likely by definition to also have a disproportionate impact on low income and vulnerable groups of local people, there were concerns expressed that at the corporate level the outcomes of the recent consultation exercises and Equality Impact Assessments had not had the chance to influence the broad brush allocation of cuts between different services.

· There were promising possibilities for partly re-providing some of these services through different means, of securing alternative sources of funding or support for certain aspects, of reducing costs in some cases through the introduction of a small voluntary levy on users and of enabling in some cases the users and other support organisations to take them over and continue them at a minimal or no cost to the authority. It was evident that the department had been working hard on most of these possibilities, but also that little concrete agreement had as yet been secured, mainly due to the short timetables imposed and the need to proceed carefully at each stage.


· The savings involved, especially in the remaining of the current financial year were relatively small and a delay in finalising the decision to the end of the financial year could be contained within the current year’s contingencies. Such a delay would have no impact on the long-term financial plans of the council, i.e. the base budget and therefore it would not derail the integrity of the current budget process.


The proposals as they stand had started undermining the confidence of at least some of the users, potential users and their advocates in the future ability of the Council to provide an adequate service to low income and vulnerable elderly residents. Since maintaining the public’s confidence on the service is essential component of delivering an efficient service in this field, it would appear that allowing a bit more time for officers to work with users and other organisations to concretise some of the alternatives and enable a smooth transition would demonstrate the authority’s determination to listen to the concerns expressed and to minimise the impact of the proposed cuts on the ground.

Publication Date: 27/06/2011

Date of Decision: 27/06/2011

Decided at Meeting: 27/06/2011 - Overview and Scrutiny Committee

• ▶ Reply