-Discussion with Councillor Ian Wingfield, Cabinet Member for Housing
-Discussion with housing officers
Minutes:
5.1 The Chair introduced the 4 Squares issue, reminding members of the sub-committee that this was a continuation of the discussion held on 11 January. He welcomed the residents to the meeting, and Councillor Ian Wingfield, cabinet member with responsibility for housing.
5.2 Councillor Wingfield was invited to make some introductory comments on the 4 Squares issue
5.3 He began by stating that there is a serious issue to be addressed and how unhappy he feels with the way residents feel misled.
5.4 He summarised that there are 3 main issues that he intends to address
- The paucity of the decision-making process
- Inclusion and meaningful consultation with the residents
- Contract management
5.5 He also explained that there is a large funding shortfall of some £313 million for housing maintenance overall, and he has a responsibility to look across the whole borough at priorities. The full information from the stock condition survey will be available in April and this is the time when decisions on funding for schemes can be made.
5.6 Members of the sub-committee reminded Councillor Wingfield that the outstanding work was not “decent homes” work.
5.7 The Chair invited members of the sub-committee to ask questions to Councillor Wingfield.
5.8 What work is underway to get a cost-effective solution to security on estates?
In one instance it is windows rather than doors that are the issue. The residents explained the other security issues on the estate and the benefits that have been seen at the 2 blocks which have had the work done. The Council needs to involve residents when devising solutions and in the future would be doing so on an ongoing basis.
5.9 It is important that the Council does not make promises that it can not keep. It is clear that in this instance the tendering process went wrong. What lessons have be learnt from this?
In the future contract management needs to be a lot tighter, and a better key performance indicator framework will be used.
5.10 Why is the leftover money from the original £8million not allocated to the estate?
It was only ever an indicative allocation. When the decent homes priority was established the amount available for other works was diminished.
5.11 Can you give some indication that 4 squares will be a priority once the resource levels are known in April?
We will be giving 4 Squares special consideration but can not make an absolute commitment at this stage. The Council will be looking at it closely.
5.12 Can we be reassured that the new director of housing will have a tight grip on the contract management?
We will ensure that the process is much more open in the future and be looking at 2 aspects of 4 Squares, what needs to happen now, and also what went wrong in terms of the contract overspend, communications with residents, and communications between officers and councillors.
The overspend on the first contract was signed off by the director under delegated powers.
The council accepts that the main issue was the lack of openness about the decision-making processes. This can be improved in the future.
5.13 In 2009 it was not clear that work at 4 Squares would not be progressed. What has changed?
By April/May we will be able to publish the results of the 2010 stock condition survey and will be able to take things forward.
5.14 Why was there no progress on 4 Squares last year when correspondence with the local councillor said it would be looked at again after the contracts process had been resolved?
Until the stock condition survey becomes available there is no real baseline of the level of resources necessary to deliver the overall housing investment need. Difficult choices had to be made because there was a gap between need and the resources available.
5.15 Is there a way of taking action against the contractors?
The contractors do still do some work for Southwark. The issue is one of contract management which will be strengthened in the future. Legal advice will be taken about the first contract tender which was so much lower than the final cost of the work.
5.16 There is a strong feeling that there should still be £1.5 million available to be spent on 4 Squares. What assurances can be given that this resource will be made available?
We need a comprehensive solution to the 4 Squares issues, it may be that it costs more or less than the original amount indicated for the project. We need to wait until April/May for the Stock Condition survey report before a decision can be taken.
5.17 When the council makes its decisions in April will they look not only at the costs of the scheme but also at the savings which will result from not having to constantly repair the vandalism on Marden and Layard?
All factors will be taken into consideration.
5.18 Things on the estate are bad; does the Council recognise the urgency of the situation?
We do, and we have processes underway for improvements in contract management. We will make a decision as soon as the stock condition survey becomes available.
5.19 The Chair thanked the residents and Councillor Al-Samerai for their attendance and undertook to keep those at the meeting updated on progress on this issue over the coming months.