Transcript

Transcript

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the London Borough Opinion Overview and Scrutiny Committee. This meeting is being live streamed on YouTube, so welcome to everyone viewing online. Members who have joined us remotely will not be able to vote and your attendance will not be officially recorded, however, it would be reflected in the minutes. Can everyone and you remotely hear me? Concerning meeting etiquette, please direct all questions via myself. For the benefit of members of the public and the press, can I ask that all attendees, if their names and role when they're speaking, for the first time? May I also remind members and officers to speak up clearly in the chamber so that the clock and the public can hear you? Meeting of the London Borough Opinion Overview and Scrutiny Committee is now called to order. This meeting this evening would be in two parts. There is a call in and I will be dealing with the call in for us and then we'll be dealing with the scrutiny meeting in its own right in the second half of this meeting upon the conclusion of the call in. Is that agreed? Is that agreed? It's agreed. Apologies for absence. I have before me Councilor Lakmini Shaw, Joshua Garfield and Ellen Kemp and Poi Leslie and those are the last two co-opted members who send their apologies. Are there any other apologies? Not, I'm aware of chair. Do we agree to note those apologies? Do we agree to note those apologies? Thank you. Decoration of interest. Are there any members wishing to declare any interest? That takes me directly into the court in and the court in is the Juniper Ventures. This is a key officer decision, a decision that was made on the 15th of April, 2025. Juniper Ventures Limited is a company owned by Serum Council. Juniper Ventures also has subsidiary companies. Juniper Ventures Limited and N-A-S-P-M Limited. Collectively, they are referred to as Juniper. They are referred to as the company or Juniper Group in this document, established seven years ago from the externalization of new catering and cleaning services. The companies specialize in delivery of education catering and education and the public building cleaning service primarily in the borough of Newham, with additional work in corporate catering, hospitality and health and safety advisory services. Juniper Group of companies employ 632 across 788 posts and as turnover of 23.8 million per year split between cleaning and catering. Juniper Group of companies, 82% of turnover is a school with a small amount of work in public building and other work on health and safety. Juniper Group of companies, but it's by way of introduction for this. Juniper Group of companies, in terms of witnesses, I have before me executive members series with and Neil Wilson. Juniper Group of companies, I also have in terms of offices, Jason and Andy. And some more. And then you'll need to unlock your iPad first. I'm sorry for that interruption. You were saying some. There's some other colleagues as well. Okay. So, okay. So what I would do is give them a chance to introduce themselves so that we can have a record of who's here and in what capacity. So before I go on to do that, I would then introduce myself, which I'm Anthony McCormand, chair for the VU and scrutiny committee and member for Albert. So, I'm a member of the council and council. And councilor Susan Masters, chair of adult and adults health scrutiny. And I represent East and South Ward. Council of Carling Parkway, South. Councilor Mahmood, mayor of the position of the council. Councilor Mahmood, mayor of the position of the council. Councilor Mahmood, mayor of the position of the council. Councilor Paul, Stratford ward. And over to yourselves. Montez Begum, head of law. Rachel McCoy, director of law and governance. Jason Srelitz, corporate director of adults and health. Andy Gold, head of food strategy. Gordon McFarlane, director of HR and OD. Councilor Neil Wilson, health and adult social care cabinet lead. Councilor Sarah Ruiz, cabinet lead for children services and education. Mike Jones, head of finance for talent and health. And Commonwealth corporate director of resources. Councilor Patel, head of scrutiny and governance at UN. That's by way of introduction. Okay? I'm sorry, Zofika. Can you introduce yourself? Thank you, Chair. Apologies for not being there. Councilor Zofika, Ali, cabinet lead for finance and resources. Thank you. Okay. All right. I continue. The purpose of this item is to consider a call in of a key officer. This is a key decision made on the 15th of April, 20, 25. This item was called in for consideration by overview and scrutiny committee in accordance with the provision of rule 15 of the overview and scrutiny committee procedural rule in part 4 of the council's constitution. This is a key decision and there after may either one take no further action or two before it back to the decision maker for reconsideration setting out in writing the nature of his concern. Order of the meeting this meeting, the order of this meeting is in five parts. The force is to hear the reasons from the calling, and that would be led by the members of the overview and scrutiny committee. The second is to have a brief response from the executive team. Third, we would be going into question and answering session. The fourth part would be members of the overview and scrutiny committee would deliberate on the responses that we have heard. And the fifth, we will be deciding on whether to uphold the calling, and if so, we come up with a series of recommendations. So, at this juncture, I would hand over to my colleagues who would give a brief description and make brief comments as to why this decision has been called in. Thank you. Thanks, Arsene. Thanks, Arsene. One of the reasons for the resolution of the creation of a two-class world sense and impact on the new and capital policy. How does the decision meet the new and capital's commitment to eliminate discrimination in a governmently female workforce? Thank you, Chair. If I may, this is my benefit. Have you dealt with the exempt materials and whether members have questions about exempt materials? I would take that, please. Okay. Thank you. Do you continue? Yes, I do. Bear with me. All right. Mr. Summary. Long-term financial viability and risks in the unit. What information must you think is that you're making the decision to ensure long-term financial viability when creating a two-class world by the erosion of annually and sick pay conditions of a predominantly female, and what has been done and what assumptions have been made? C. Equal pay comes. What considerations have been given to the potential exposure of financial and future as a result of the reduction of annually and sickly turn of conditions of June of the event? Last. And that's it. Any other member? Okay. I would just follow on from Councillor Lester Hudson in terms of our concern. Councillor Hudson has the two classes of workers, but this has the potential to create. We also have seen that in similar situation, Bominam, who is not too far from us, end up being, having to refer to section 114 notice as a result of the legal and the financial implication as a result of the cost. I must say, suggesting that that would happen to us. But the fact is, it was as a result of a two-class workforce that led to that consequence. We also are aware that some years ago, New York Council decided to benchmark the then Juniper with their male colleagues. And I said male colleagues because Juniper Ventures is primarily or the majority of the workforce is female. And I said that on the back of what I mentioned about Bominam. So we do need to be mindful of. And what legal advice we concern about that, what legal advice was given, the risk that was being told, and what consideration was given to the risk, and whether we have the appetite to be subjected or exposed to those risks should it arises. And those are some of our concerns regarding this officer's decision and also the role that members played in it. So a combination of all of those give rise to concerns by overview and scrutiny committee. And therefore, we are here and discussing this calling. Is does any other member want to add to that? I do, Chair. I do, Chair. I do, Chair. Chair. Chair. Chair. Yes, you may. Thank you, Chair. It's just really a question to add context. Thank you. In March 2023, the Council converted just over £4 million of working capital into shares. There was no mention of any financial issues or problems in that cabinet report. Can someone please explain what changed over the past two years? There was no mention in that report in 2023 of the financial conditions which laid out by officers and lead members. So just for context, what changed in the past two years? Please. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Paul. So that's the end of our submissions and our reasons for calling this item in. Is there any questions for us by the executive? Any comments? No? Okay. Now I would move over to the executive and now is your turn to present your case to us. I would allow about 10 minutes of that. Would that be collectively 10 minutes? Is that enough? Okay. I think we may need to move into closing. Okay. All right. Mawa. Most of this, they're the green paper. The reason I haven't moved yet into closed session, because we are not getting into the actual question and answering session. We're just setting out to the case for the members of the public. They need to hear the case set out. There's some aspect of it, but will be dealt in closed session. When that time comes, I'm going to move into closed session. To move into closed session now, without the case being set out, members of the public will know why we are here. That's fine. That's fine. Just as long as, yeah, it just stays. Yeah. I am aware of it. Am I moving to closed session at the appropriate time? Thank you. Okay. Who's going to present for us? Cabinet members. Yeah. We're going to set a bit of a background to this, because I think it's really important. So about 18 months, two years ago, the GB Union contacted, went to Juniper because they were concerned about maybe loss of contracts and what that would actually mean for the Juniper and its workforce. There were conversations then. I don't know how far they went, but certainly it was raised about 18 months, two years ago. Neil and I became involved in September last year, where we were alerted to the fact that they were listening to changing terms and conditions. Neil and I were both very clear that this was not something that we necessarily wanted, the path we wanted to go down, and that actually the conversations needed to be had with the unions. There are three unions had members in Juniper, GMB, Unite and Unison, and we were very clear that that negotiation with the unions and with the workforce had to take place, that we were not prepared to do anything unless there was agreement with the unions and the workforce. That we were not prepared to take place. That we were not prepared to take place. That, we understand, was going along at pace. We were taking meetings with the workforce and the three unions, and then was it earlier this year? We all of a sudden, all of a sudden, the regional officers decided that they needed to get involved. We had meetings with three regional officers, and negotiations were ongoing from then, and have today is a position that was agreed by all three unions at regional officer level and all the workforce. Just a little bit of that. Yeah, probably want to add something to that. Just to say that throughout those negotiations, we made it very clear as Captain at least that we were not talking about a directly employed workforce, but we wanted things to be done in the right way that would not only talk about viability, very real aspect, as equally important to us as the commitment to the London living wage and the viability of a school meal service. Yeah. We are in a situation where there's only four local authorities out of 32 in the London area who have a directly workforce. Yeah, and Waltham Forest have just lost their distance last week. Yeah, that's all from us at the moment. Okay, and does that include yourself to Jason, or do you want to make any comments? I'll hand over to Gordon to speak about the questions. Okay, so most of this is in the green paper. So anything you speak about now cannot be in the green paper until I move into that. So you're not going to be saying anything regarding these papers, the green. Okay, I'll try and keep it general. General. And then in the next few minutes, I move into closed session. I just need to give members of the public a flavour of why we are here. Yes. Yes. Yeah. So I think broadly around two tier workforce. We certainly understand the concerns about two tier workforce. Can you speak up a bit? Yeah, sure. And understand the concerns about two tier workforce. We're dealing with separate organisations as a starting point. And certainly, you know, within the council where they're sorry, there's a question. Okay, there's certainly within the council where the question is leading. There is certainly no two tier workforce within the organisation within the council. And I think a position has been backed up by detailed quality impact assessment. And clearly, there's a backdrop of the, you know, the Juniper financials as well in terms of the business case as to why this had to be done. So I think probably keep it that brief in terms of keeping it general. Okay. We can get into more specifics. Yeah. Yeah. Sure. Chair, could I add that Juniper's competitors will be pleased to hear anything they can. It really, I think, you know, Mom, as you would say this, the stuff we are talking about really is valuable to us as a, as a council and as a competitive business. And we'll get to some of that. I think in the example session, just how, um, much show like that. It's really worth emphasizing. Um, and could you speak up? I'm so sorry. I thought these mics were working better. I think this stuff really is a great commercial value, actually. It's not a world we, we deal with all the time in the council, but actually some of the stuff we're talking about here really incredibly interesting and sensitive to the competitors. So yeah, it's the best to say, so, so worth sort of, and I think in the example session, we'll be able to read lots of stuff there, but really worth keeping in mind if that's okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um. Okay. We concluded your submission. Well, or to offer an example session. Okay. We are. We will now. Um, members bear in mind that they are green papers. So anything that you've heard in that you wish to raise, that is not in green paper. This is your chance to ask the question. Yeah. Um, comes to us and then the pathway. I have a question. I mean, about the comment you made about, um, junior firm extensions. Um, I think, I'll take, I'm a very old person. But within company law, there's something they call listening to fairly different points of ownership. Where, um, there are certain legal cases. In fact, um, it's the holding company that's really in control, or the directors that are really in control. So I'm just raising the issue that, um, while you may say it is a separate company, and you believe it's completely mean fenced. Um, have you taken appropriate legal advice about lifting the veil of incorporation? That is number one. Number two, if you go onto the company's house website, and it's about, um, individuals or organizations with significant, um, control over the company. When you look at Juniper Ventures, it says that organization. Let me, I want to be absolutely clear. And just read it out to you. Right. Um, the organization or the individual. Very significant. Um, that's interesting. The mayor and burglages of the London Bar of New York. So I'm just questioning, you're saying it won't completely ring things. I'm just questioning that. Maybe that's not quite the case. I think perhaps later on, um, both session can deal with the first point and, and in, in relation to equal pay claims and how equal pay claims can be made and defended. Um, that's probably the, the, that conversation and perhaps moment has a second point. Yeah. I think we can, if we can deal with that in the closed session, there is some information in the exempt appendices where the legal advice has been sought as to associate. Yes. And that will cover the point. Yeah. Thanks. Golly. I just had a question of clarification. If that's okay, chair. Um, Sarah, you just, earlier when, when you was giving your remarks, you, you said state to something, and I just wanted to clarify if I heard right. You said the current position was agreed by all three unions and workforce. Is that correct? Yes. Thank you. Just wanted to make sure I heard that right. Right. Yeah. If that comes to a charter. Councillor Wilson and Ruiz, you said that in September you became aware of this situation. Can I just establish, has this always been, has Juniper always been in your portfolios? Well, it's in the, it's a part of my portfolio by the very fact. They provide school meals, education, but the actual responsibility lies within adult health and social care. Because it's deemed that the provision of food and. Yeah. And. So I'm only here because I've got education. Yeah. The, the food strategy relies for them for health. Yeah. It's under the food strategy. Yeah. It comes under. Me. Public health. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Just following from. My colleague's question said, just in regards to what's just been said, I guess the question I have is. Which member of the executive cabinet sits on the shareholders board? No. Come. Sorry. To jump in. Are you me? Hi, sir. Exempt session. No, the way we structure and organize it. So I can fit a role known as representing the shareholder and we go out of our way to make sure. So for example, I wouldn't attend for exactly some of the reasons that are discussed here. Actually, the way this process is handled is very careful when you give me the thing that I'm already going to interest in territory. We should be sharing. We do this very carefully to make sure that's the case and it would absolutely be inappropriate. I don't quite understand the member ask if any member sits on the board. Yes. And not a trust or this is a company and for the way that structure is. Sorry. And in the shareholder board. No members sit on the show. Right. Thank you. Just for clarity, who is the lead member responsible for Juniper? I'm unclear by the answer given who is actually the lead member responsible for Juniper who carries responsibility. Well, probably you. Yeah, probably me. But there's a joint responsibility. Like we're dealing with one council. There's, I mean, you know, I, to take a parallel, I'm, I'm the person who signed, who signs off a cabinet report on domestic violence, for instance, but that's shared by three cabinet leaves. So it's, it's, it's a bit of a. Okay. Only one question. Okay. Can I ask the question again? Yes. Yes. No, no. Can I ask the question again? Maybe. Who is the person? Neil. I'll say me. If it. No, councillor, Neil Wilson, it sits within his portfolio. Right. Okay. Thank you. So councillor, Neil Wilson, you are the lead member who took the decisions. Is that correct? Is that correct? Because councillor, Neil Wilson is the lead member responsible for this decision. So this was a chief officer decision. I can't hear that chair. This was an, it was an officer key decision, councillor Paul. I can't support. Okay. Sure. According. Okay. So who is the cabinet? Right. So council. This is our guy. There's a delay. Okay. According to the papers. The mayor. Yeah. Turn my camera off chair. Wilson. And. Yeah. Yeah. I hear it. Okay. Terry. Okay. Okay. Terry. Yes. He's turning it off. Does it spot for him? Yeah. I'm listening chair. Okay. So for. Yes. Covenant members are the mayor. Covenant members were consulted according to the papers. So that's Zofie, Neil and Sarah. And the mayor. Okay. Check. Right. Check. Can I ask a question? Chair river gas the governance. There's four. You just give me four cabinet members. Have each have a piece of this subject. I want to know who is the responsible cabinet member and maybe perhaps an officer can tell me who is the main cabinet member responsible. I will repeat the answer they're given by my colleague. It is myself. So Neil it says it's him. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. It's. Okay. And can I just ask a following question on the. Okay. Thank you. And there's a question. A question was asked about the shareholder board or normally called the local authority training company board. Can someone tell me, is there any cabinet members who go along to that meeting? No. Okay, thank you. Okay. Yes, I did. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. And if there's no other question in this session, I will move. Okay. We can answer council of Wilson's question about the earlier cabinet paper from 20. Time. That's the pause question. Sorry about the early cabinet paper. That would be a strange. That's the pause question. Um, section six of that paper talks specifically about the year end negative position created by COVID and the headwind and the specific need actually to take this action in order for the company to have financial reserves to be able to operate and to continue. It's really clear that COVID was an unbelievably tough time for the sector. It talks about, um, that position then and the challenges they were in to the paper laid out how well they've done to survive this and how only five local authority catering companies were still standing. And then section six of the paper outlines the significantly negative financial position that that created. But also the context section five of that paper talks all about that context. And in essence, the remarkable thing that 32 London boroughs. Newham was one of only five standing. Yeah. But that was sorry. The last of those questions that we can probably talk about in public. It's all in public. Okay. Thank you. Chair. Chair. I have a. Chair. I have a supplementary to that answer. Sure. Yeah. Um, what you haven't mentioned and can you just tell me. Before 2022, there was Juniper Pursuits and Juniper Ventures. Juniper Ventures traded within the borough. Juniper Pursuits traded without outside the borough. Juniper Pursuits often tender at below the other living wage. Since 2022, was any instruction politically or officers given to Juniper to stop that arrangement? Thereby, Juniper Pursuits and Ventures had to tender at London living wage. As far as I'm aware, so I only picked up responsibility for the shareholder in 2022. As far as I'm aware, I've got no record of them ever tendering below London living wage. And I've got on the record from when you were director of resources, a very clear instruction that they were never to do so. And as far as I'm aware from every record, every board paper, everything I've ever seen. They have never tendered at below London living wage or without LGPS. There was a dialogue about whether we as the shareholder wanted them to do so. But we were clear and they need to jump to it. Terry, just wait for Andy to finish. Do you finish, Andy? Yeah, I've got record. Terry, go on. Yes. Chair, I'd like to, Chair, I'd like to challenge the version given. As for member of the record, I was the lead member for finance up until 2022. I'm quite clear in my time, Juniper Pursuits outside of Newham tendered at below the London living wage. Now they're tendering at the London living wage. Therefore, an instruction must have been given must have been given to instruct Juniper Pursuits to increase the price of which they tender. And if you can't answer the question in complete confidence, maybe other officers around you can add to your answer. I can say there's definitely been no instruction since 2022 to change course. The last thing on the record is a letter in 2019 that came from cabinet as it would have been then. And it was it was signed off on the direct by by resources and and yourself as lead member. That's the last thing on the record. Like, I'm happy to dig back into that for a written confirmation. But there's nothing in my time. No, no, no. Hold on. Hold on. OK. Chair. Yes, you may go ahead. Can I just say there's the implication what I did in the previous role? Right. Therefore, I'm going to say and I have the emails to prove. Right. No, I was against the decision to instruct Juniper Pursuits to increase their price of tendering, because at the time I said this would happen. I'm willing chair to offer all my emails for an internal investigation because I don't think the information given is being correct. So you made an assertion, Andy, what I did. I'm telling you what I did and I'm telling you that my recollection is completely different to yours. And I'm willing to offer via the chair all my emails and you check my emails because I've checked it. Something happened when I left the post, which increased the price of tendering for Juniper, which is left of this situation. OK, Terry, your point is well noted and your promise to share your email to resolve this matter in the next session. Conrad. I was going to say to you is we can resolve that outside if necessary. Clearly there is different recollection. You know, they actually don't know the comments, of course. They have a policy. We need to take place. There's documents that demonstrate to the conflict. We need to be corrected on that, but that is not a problem at all. It's a level of point. Surely, though, for the COVID situation, if there is any question that from 2022, the position is being out of the slide by everyone, but, you know, that's not being tenderly upon how the GDP is. OK, thank you very much. For the remainder of the meeting, I'm going to propose that we move into closed session. The reason for that is there are a lot of sensitive information contained in green paper. They are commercially sensitive and therefore not to put Juniper at commercial risk. It is only sensible that we exclude the present public. Therefore, I move that the present public be excluded from the meeting for the following item, which is this item that we discuss in of the business. To the extent that exempt information as described in part one or schedule 12 a the local government at 1972 is likely to. Is that agreed? Please. Thank you. Fair with me. No. No. Yeah. No. No. That's correct. No. It's just you and I, Terry, or? OK. All right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.