Decisions

To ensure continuity of statutory care and support services pending formal procurement

1.       Agreed to directly award contracts without competition to the providers listed in table 1 for a two year period, with the option to extend for one further year commencing from 01/08/24 and ending on 31/07/26 with a one year extension to 31/07/27, for the provision of mental health provision in accordance with CSO 23.1 on the basis that these contracts can only be supplied by a particular economic operator. 

The contract awards and values are listed in the table below:

Table 1: Proposed contract awards

2.       Noted, in compliance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, the contracts listed in Table 1 are awarded without prior publication under Regulation 32(b)(ii) competition is absent for technical reasons.

3.       Noted, the market is continually ‘tested’ by way of usual commissioning practise and the need to constantly review and assess providers, both existing and new to market, to meet the needs of residents referred to the service via both acute and community colleagues.

4.       Noted, due to the increased demand to the service, and higher levels of acuity we are experiencing, there is an ongoing requirement for RBG is to identify adequate alternative service provision via specialists in the mental health commissioning, home finding and brokerage teams on a weekly / daily basis, when there is no available capacity within our contracted settings.

5.       Noted, there are two specific posts within the newly restructured commissioning team, Lead Commissioner (MH) and Quality Assurance Lead Officer (MH). In the newly restructured Personalised Care & Support team, Care & Support Brokerage Officers allow specialism in one area with a dedicated MH Home Finding Officer and a dedicated Specialist Care and Support Broker. Operational colleagues from both acute and community settings within both the LA and ICB are also feeding in to provider intelligence including CHC and Oxleas professionals.

6.       Noted, the restructure of the integrated commissioning department created a new market sustainability and quality team who have cross cutting responsibilities to ensure we meet the requirements of the Care Act 2014, around market shaping and quality including for those with MH needs. These roles, as mentioned above, will support us in delivering our ambitions to improve MH services in Greenwich, funded across health and care, and will include the work we do alongside residents and partners to design new models of care (and implement them).

7.       Noted, in turn, what this affords us is the knowledge and insight into local provision and provider capacity, the confidence we would have in a provider to deliver a reliable, safe and affordable service, that could potentially be scaled to the numbers within the table below. There have been no alternative service providers identified in the local Greenwich area, that could match the type and size of provision as set out in the table below. 

8.       Noted, failure to secure as set out below would have a significant impact to wait lists and an insurmountable impact upon the health and wellbeing of current and future service users as it is highly likely that we would not be able to continue these support services.

In reaching its decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee (“LSC”) considered the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, the Licensing Act 2003, the Regulations made thereunder, and the Guidance issued by the Secretary of State under S.182 of that Act. In discharging its functions, the LSC did so with a view to promoting the licensing objectives of the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. 

Having considered all written representations, evidence, and oral submissions, the LSC resolved to revoke the premises licence.

The interim suspension of the premises licence was reviewed by the LSC and the LSC resolved to re-impose the suspension of the premises licence until the time to appeal against revocation of the premises licence expires or any appeal to the magistrates’ court is determined.  

Basis of Decision

The Chair informed the meeting that the LSC had viewed the cctv recordings submitted by the police.

The LSC gave due weight to the submissions of counsel for the police. The LSC noted that the DPS, who is the de facto licence holder, had engaged in serious violence. The video recording showed the DPS emerging from the premises and escalating the violence when it appeared that the incident was coming to an end between those involved. The DPS was joined by a member of staff, both were armed with weapons. The submissions for the police were that the DPS was unhelpful to police, had not called the police, and stated that there was no cctv on that side of the premises, which was false, and did not stop staff from joining the fight.

The LSC noted the history of the premises and the non-compliance with licence conditions by the DPS, including conditions relating to CCTV and staff training, and his alleged involvement in violence on two previous occasions, as set out in the evidence of the police.

The LSC noted the representations and submissions from Trading Standards relating to separate premises in Plumstead Road owned by the DPS and his wife in respect of criminal activity by tenants running a business from one of those properties. The DPS categorically denied any responsibility for the contraband tobacco activities from the premises owned and managed by his wife.   The DPS stated he had tried to speak to the tenants but they would not engage with him, that his wife was the landlord not him. The DPS stated he had no involvement in the shop.  

The DPS did not deny his involvement in the fighting outside the premises and stated he should not have done so and he made a mistake in doing so. The LSC noted that it appeared from the submissions of the DPS that trouble had been brewing much earlier inside the premises and the DPS should have at that point called the police. The LSC noted the explanation of the DPS regarding there being no cctv being available, that the cctv did not cover the whole road where the fighting was taking place. The DPS stated he called a guy to provide the cctv footage to the police.

The DPS stated he was prepared to accept any decision the LSC made. 

The LSC concluded that removing the DPS from the premises licence would not be sufficient to promote the licensing objectives as he is the owner of the business being the sole director of the company which holds the premises licence.

The LSC determined that the DPS and owner of the business had not conducted himself appropriately in preventing crime and disorder and was not able to uphold and promote the licensing objectives.

Any party aggrieved by this decision may appeal to the magistrates’ court within 21 days. 

Agreed the allocation of a one-off payment of £300to Amber Bee CIC, to support an educational project for children attending Wingfield primary School to highlight the importance of Mental Wellbeing & Internet Safety.

Agreed the allocation of a one-off payment of £162 to the Friends of Mell Street Pocket Park, to purchase gardening supplies for their community garden.

1.    Agreed the allocation of a one-off payment of £300 to the Charlton Community Champions Consortium to support the participation of Charlton communities at the 2024 Woolwich Carnival, a free cultural event to celebrate the Borough’s diversity.

2.    Noted the proposal has been submitted by Charlton Village & Riverside and Charlton Hornfair ward Councillors and split across the two wards as follows:

·        Charlton Village & Riverside = £150

·        Charlton Hornfair = £150

To agree scheme costs, scope and procurement approach

1.    Agreed the Scheme and Estimate for the development of Transitional Learning Centre (TLC) for SEND users up to the age of 25 years, at 77 Bexley Road, Eltham, London, SE9 2PE with the estimated cost of £15m.

2.    Noted that Cabinet approved funding for SEND Provision in the Children Services School Placing and Capital Programme 2022-2023 and 2024-2025 in November 2022 earmarking a budget envelope of £15m funding for the SEND Transitional Learning Centre at Bexley Road.

3.    Noted that the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Skills, approved a Contract Award [CON1447] to appoint Frankham Consultancy Group, Multi-Disciplinary Professional Services, for a RIBA Stage 3-7, following a competitive tender process.

4.    Noted that the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Skills, approved a Contract Award [CON1501] to appoint Galliford Try Building Limited for Pre-Construction Services at the end of RIBA Stage 3 to allow for Design Development and agree a Contract Sum at the end of RIBA Stage 4.

5.    Noted that pre-application advice was undertaken with Royal Borough of Greenwich Planning department, with the scheme receiving positive feedback as a result of the proposed design aspirations.

6.    Authorised the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Skills in consultation with the Director of Children’s Services to vary the scheme details in accordance with the priority projects set out in paragraphs 4.81 – 4.90 of the School Place Planning and Capital Programme 2022/23 - 2024/25 (as approved by Cabinet on 2nd November 2022) along with paragraphs 4.75 and 4.81 – 4.83 of the School Place Planning and Capital Programme 2023/24 - 2025/26 (as approved by Cabinet on 15th November 2023).

7.    Noted that the authority to the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Skills at paragraph 6 above to vary the scheme details does not include an authority to vary the scheme budget as approved under the Cabinet’s decision dated 15th November 2023.