This week in Lambeth:

• The Licensing Sub-Committee met on Wednesday 25 September 2024 and refused a new premises licence for Commune Studios Limited at Arch 657 Portslade Road, due to concerns about the potential for noise nuisance and public safety.
• The Corporate Committee met on Thursday 26 September 2024 and approved the recommendations on Lambeth's compliance with the CIPFA Financial Management Code, but expressed frustration about the lack of information on Homes for Lambeth (HfL) and the number of empty homes in the borough.

Licensing Sub-Committee - Wednesday 25 September 2024

The Licensing Sub-Committee met to decide on three applications. The application by Commune Studios Limited, for a new premises licence at Arch 657 Portslade Road in Stockwell West & Larkhall Ward was refused due to concerns around public nuisance, public safety and the suitability of the dispersal arrangements. The applications by Lowman Foods Limited for a new premises licence for Slab City at 8 The Pavement, and Mr Okkes Toprak for a new premises licence for Istanbul Food Gate at 26 The High Parade were both granted.

Commune Studios Ltd - Arch 657 Portslade Road, London, SW8 3DH

This application was for a creative studio space that would operate during the week as a studio for hire, and at weekends host events. The requested hours were 6pm to 11pm on Thursday, 6pm to 3am on Friday and Saturday, and 12pm to 3pm on Sunday, with late night refreshment and recorded music until 3am on Friday and Saturday. The committee heard representations from the applicant, the Licensing Authority, and a local resident.

The Licensing Authority objected to the application on the grounds that the hours requested were outside the framework hours for the area, which are set out in Lambeth's Statement of Licensing Policy 2024-2029. The policy states that the framework hours for new premises licences in areas designated as a 'secondary town/local/district centre'¹ are 11pm. The applicant argued that the designation was incorrect, as the arch was not in a town centre location, but the committee disagreed. The committee also heard concerns from a local resident about noise nuisance, public safety, and the adequacy of the dispersal arrangements, particularly given the location of the arch on a gated private business estate road with limited lighting and only one exit. The resident also questioned the advertising of the application, which they said was not displayed correctly. The Licensing Officer confirmed that the notice had been correctly displayed, as confirmed by the Licensing Act 2003 and the Premises Licence and Club Premises Certificate Regulations 2005.

The applicant explained that they had chosen the location specifically to avoid causing noise nuisance, and highlighted the substantial soundproofing measures they were implementing. They also described the robust dispersal policy they would use to ensure that customers left the premises quietly and did not cause disturbance. Despite these assurances, the committee were not satisfied that the premises could promote the licensing objectives of preventing public nuisance and public safety, and refused the application.

The refusal of this application demonstrates the importance of the framework hours set out in Lambeth's Statement of Licensing Policy and the need for applicants to consider the potential impact of their proposed activities on the local community. The committee's decision to refuse the application despite the applicant's assurances about soundproofing and dispersal arrangements shows that they are taking a robust approach to protecting residents from noise nuisance and public safety concerns.

Lowman Foods Limited - Slab City, 8 The Pavement, London, SW4 0HY

This application was for a small pizza restaurant that was seeking permission to sell alcohol on and off the premises. The Licensing Authority and the Food, Health and Safety team had both submitted representations against the application, but following negotiations with the applicant, they agreed to withdraw their objections subject to the addition of a number of conditions to the licence.

The Licensing Authority's concerns related to public nuisance and public safety, particularly given the location of the premises on a busy high street. The applicant agreed to amend their requested hours to match those recommended in Lambeth's Statement of Licensing Policy 2024-2029, and also volunteered to limit the number of customers allowed to consume alcohol on the premises to eight. These concessions satisfied the Licensing Authority's concerns.

The Food, Health and Safety team's concerns related to the lack of a toilet for customers, and the need for customers to walk through the food preparation area to access the staff toilet. The applicant argued that as their premises were predominantly takeaway, they were not required to provide a toilet for customers under BS 6465:2011+A1:2017, a code of practice for sanitary installations. However, the Food, Health and Safety team were concerned that, as the applicant was also seeking permission to sell alcohol for consumption on the premises, they could not rely on this exemption. Ultimately, the applicant agreed to limit the number of customers consuming alcohol on the premises to eight, thereby removing the need for a customer toilet. This satisfied the Food, Health and Safety team's concerns.

The committee granted the application, subject to a number of conditions. In addition to those already mentioned, the committee added a condition requiring the display of a notice asking delivery drivers to use their vehicles responsibly.

This application is a good example of how the Licensing Sub-Committee can work with applicants to find solutions that address the concerns of responsible authorities while still allowing businesses to operate. The applicant's willingness to amend their application and agree to conditions demonstrates their commitment to operating their business in a way that minimises the risk of noise nuisance and public safety concerns.

Istanbul Food Gate - 26 The High Parade Streatham High Road London W16 1EX

This application was for a supermarket at 26 The High Parade, Streatham High Road that requested permission to sell alcohol off the premises between 11am and 11pm every day. Five local residents had objected to the application, but none of them attended the meeting. The applicant agreed to a number of conditions requested by the Licensing Authority to prevent public nuisance and street drinking, and the committee granted the application.

The conditions included restrictions on the sale of high-strength beers, lagers and ciders, the sale of single cans of beer, lager or cider, and the sale of miniature bottles of spirits. The applicant's willingness to agree to these conditions demonstrated their commitment to preventing public nuisance and promoting the licensing objectives.

Corporate Committee - Thursday 26 September 2024

The Corporate Committee is a key part of Lambeth Council's governance structure. It is responsible for scrutinising the council's performance and holding the cabinet to account. The committee has a wide-ranging remit, covering everything from finance and risk management to health and safety. This week's meeting was typical of the committee's work, with discussions covering a wide range of topics, including the council's compliance with the CIPFA Financial Management Code, the Key Risk Report for Quarter 1 2024/25, and the Corporate Health and Safety Policy.

Empty Homes Action Plan

The committee were expecting an update on the number of empty homes in the borough at this meeting, and were frustrated to be told that the draft plan is still waiting for approval from the Cabinet. They highlighted the urgent need for action, given the estimated 4,000 empty homes in the borough and the ongoing housing crisis. Councillor Meldrum felt that the council's existing policy of charging a four times council tax premium on long-term empty homes didn't seem to have a desired effect. The committee called for a ward-by-ward breakdown of empty homes to understand the full extent of the problem and agreed to add the Empty Homes Action Plan as a spotlight item for their next meeting.

The committee's frustration reflects the ongoing concerns about housing in Lambeth, which is a key issue for many residents. As this was also a topic raised by the Licensing Sub-Committee, it is clear that housing remains a key area of concern for both residents and elected members. The committee's request for a ward-by-ward breakdown of empty homes is a sensible one, as it will allow them to better understand the scale of the problem in different parts of the borough. It will be interesting to see what the Empty Homes Action Plan proposes when it is finally presented to the committee.

Housing Service Improvement and Transformation Programme

The committee also raised concerns about the lack of a housing improvement plan, which had been promised to them at their last meeting by the Chief Executive, Fiona Connolly. Councillor Meldrum was concerned that the plan had not been mentioned in the minutes of the previous meeting, and asked for this to be amended. Following a discussion about the scope of the plan, Paul Rock, Interim Assistant Director of Law & Governance, advised the committee that the relevant plan was called the Housing Service Improvement and Transformation Programme. This will be provided to the committee at their next meeting.

Councillor Meldrum also raised concerns about the lack of detail in the minutes of the committee's meetings, and asked if it would be possible to get transcripts. The Democratic Services Officer said that he would raise this with the relevant officers. This echoes Councillor Adem's concerns in the previous Licensing Sub-Committee meeting, where she questioned how the public was supposed to understand the investigation into a £170,000 procurement issue if the report was heavily redacted.

£170,000 Procurement Issue

The committee were given an update on an investigation into a £170,000 procurement issue, which had been going on for a number of months. Paul Rock advised the committee that the investigation had been completed but that the final report could not be shared with them in a public forum as it contained a lot of sensitive information. He suggested that the report be shared with the Chair in a private meeting, and that it then be shared with the committee as a whole in a subsequent private meeting.

This suggestion was challenged by Councillor Adem, who was concerned that it would not be possible for the public to scrutinise the findings of the investigation if the report was not made public. Paul Rock said that this had been attempted, but that it had proven to be impossible to redact the report in a way that would make it both readable and protect sensitive information. He added that the report could not be published in a way that would potentially cause legal implications for the council.

Councillor Adem expressed frustration that the Corporate Committee had been waiting for this information for three months, adding:

Every single item so far that we've done hasn't come to the committee and they're like months overdue. So it just, yeah, it is frustrating and it feels, yeah, I don't know.

The committee's frustration is understandable, as they are being asked to scrutinise the council's performance without being given access to all of the relevant information. The council's decision to keep the report confidential is likely due to concerns about data protection and legal liability. However, this lack of transparency is likely to damage public trust in the council. It is important that the council finds a way to balance the need for confidentiality with the need for public accountability.

Lambeth's Compliance with the CIPFA Financial Management Code

The committee discussed a report on the council's compliance with the CIPFA Financial Management Code. Rob Browning, Acting Assistant Director of Corporate Finance, presented the report and highlighted a number of areas where the council has performed well. The committee were particularly pleased to see that the council had achieved 84% green ratings in its self-assessment. However, Councillor Abrams suggested that the rating for committee governance should be downgraded from Green to Amber, as the committee has not yet recruited an independent member since the last one left a year ago.

The committee also heard a representation from Galinda Ghanivos, a member of the Residents Board at Cressingham Gardens, who criticised the amber rating for project management, saying that it should be red. Ghanivos gave the example of the Cressingham Gardens TMO project, which she said is four years behind schedule and has spent nearly £500,000 without delivering any services. Ghanivos also criticised the council's lack of an action plan for the refurbishment of empty homes on Cressingham Gardens. Browning said that the amber rating for project management was given because there was limited evidence to support a green rating, and that this was highlighted by the independent review.

The committee also discussed the challenges facing the Housing Revenue Account (HRA), and the impact of the Homes for Lambeth (HfL) transition. Councillor Warren said that she was concerned that the report did not mention the current state of the HRA or the impact of bringing HfL back in-house. Browning explained that the council is working to understand the impact of the HfL transition on the council's balance sheet, and that this is a complex process that has been delayed. He said that he understood that the committee was frustrated, but that the transition was not an easy process.

The committee's discussion of the CIPFA Financial Management Code is a reminder of the importance of sound financial management in local government. The council's good performance in its self-assessment is encouraging, but the concerns raised by Councillor Abrams and Ghanivos highlight the need for continued improvement in areas such as committee governance and project management. The ongoing challenges facing the HRA and the impact of the HfL transition are also a reminder of the complex financial environment in which local councils operate.

Key Risk Report Quarter 1

The committee received a report on the council's key risks at the end of quarter 1 2024/25. James Rimmington, Risk Manager for the Finance Directorate, explained that the report was focused on the top ten overarching risk themes, and that these risks are subject to regular monitoring and review.

The committee raised a number of questions about the risks identified in the report. Councillor Adem asked about the likely impact of the high risk rating given to the financial planning risk. Browning explained that this risk is largely driven by temporary accommodation, social care costs, and inflation. Councillor Abrams said that it was scary that the council is looking to restrict its spending, as this could be seen as cuts to services. She also reiterated her frustration about the lack of information about HfL.

Councillor Meldrum asked for the names of the risk holders to be included in the report, saying:

we have not got an organisation chart, I don't know who all these people are, bring some names please.

Rimmington said that he was not sure if he could share names due to the public nature of the report.

The committee's discussion of the Key Risk Report is a reminder of the importance of risk management in local government. The risks identified in the report are significant, and the council needs to ensure that it has robust plans in place to mitigate them. The committee's request for the names of the risk holders to be included in the report is a reasonable one, as it would increase accountability and transparency. The council should consider whether it can share this information without compromising data protection or legal liability.

Corporate Health and Safety Policy

The committee discussed the Corporate Health and Safety Policy. Alexis Correa, Head of Corporate Health & Safety, introduced the report and explained that it aims to build on the council's existing work in improving health and safety management systems.

Councillor Meldrum asked about the impact of the previous version of the policy, and how many health and safety incidents had been recorded. Correa said that he did not have this data but would bring it to the next meeting.

Councillor Meldrum also asked about how the policy addressed the safety of council staff who are often subject to abuse from residents, particularly given that residents can find out their personal details on social media. Correa explained that the council is developing a policy on violence and aggression towards staff and that it is looking to implement a system to track incidents and take action against residents who abuse staff.

Councillor Meldrum also asked about how the council is protecting its staff who are working from home. She said that there is no mention of working from home in the report, and that this is a growing area that needs to be addressed. Richard Lebrun, Assistant Director of Public Protection, Insurance & Regulatory Services, said that the council is constantly reviewing its policies on lone working and violence and aggression, and that Correa is working on a policy that covers both.

Councillor Abrams said that she was encouraged to see a number of mentions of trade unions in the report, and that she would like to extend an invitation to the trade union health and safety representatives to attend future meetings of the committee.

Councillor Byrant asked about the financial implications of the policy, as the report states that there are no financial implications but also outlines a need for additional resources to be allocated. Correa explained that there are no additional costs envisaged, and that the costs of recruiting for the schools health and safety adviser role should be covered by the income generated by the service level agreement for schools.

Councillor Byrant asked if the costs of increasing capacity in the Corporate Health & Safety Team had been factored into the council's budget. Correa said that he did not know but that any team would need to grow to meet demand.

Councillor Meldrum said that she felt the policy did not adequately address the issue of stress that council staff are under and that the next version of the policy should take into account the external pressures that staff are under.

Lebrun said that he was happy to bring a list of all of the council's corporate health and safety policies to the next meeting of the committee.

The Corporate Committee's discussion of the Corporate Health and Safety Policy is a reminder of the importance of protecting the health and safety of council staff. The committee's concerns about the impact of social media on staff safety are particularly relevant, as this is a growing issue for many organisations. The council's commitment to developing a policy on violence and aggression towards staff is welcome, but it is important that this policy is robust and effective. The council should also ensure that it is doing everything it can to protect the health and safety of its staff who are working from home.