You are here

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Civic Centre, High Road, Wood Green, N22 8LE

Contact: Rob Mack, Principal Scrutiny Officer 

Items
No. Item

18.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Mark Blake and Uzma Naseer (Parent Governor representative).

19.

Items of Urgent Business

Minutes:

None.

20.

Declarations of interest

A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

 

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

 

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

 

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Minutes:

Councillor Mallett stated that she was a governor at Broadwaters.  

21.

Update on Recommendations from the Ofsted Inspection of Services for Children in Need of Health and Protection, Looked After Children and Care Leavers and Review of the Effectiveness of the Local Safeguarding Children Board pdf icon PDF 277 KB

To receive an update on progress with implementing the recommendations and areas for improvement from the Ofsted inspections of services for children in need of health and protection, children looked after and care leavers and of the effectiveness of the Local Safeguarding Children Board.

Minutes:

Inspection on the Effectiveness of the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB)

 

The Panel considered an update on progress with the implementation of the recommendations from the Ofsted inspection of 2014 on the effectiveness of the Local Safeguarding Children Board (LSCB).  He reported that there were only four recommendations that directly concerned the LSCB and these had all been dealt with within a few months of the report.  

 

He stated that participation from schools was much better, with Head Teachers attending meetings regularly.  He met periodically with the Head Teachers Forum and, in addition, the LSCB had initiated specific pieces of work with schools.  In respect of Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE), the LSCB’s guidance had been in the process of being updated when OFSTED had visited.  There was now a better understanding of the role of gangs within this.  More work had also taken place on missing children. 

 

A recent independent audit had assessed the LSCB as now being good.  In particular, better systems were now in place.  He was confident that were OFSTED to re-inspect now, they would say that the LSCB had addressed its previous recommendations fully.

 

In answer to a question regarding historical abuse, he stated that there were now systems in place to prevent abuse that had not been around 30 years ago.  The priority was to ensure that perpetrators did not pose a risk to other people. In addition, consideration needed to be given to communication.  Some schools still needed to undertaken further work on their safeguarding procedures but there was now a range of support that was available.  Not all schools had their procedures on their websites but the numbers of those that did had improved.  OFSTED had been very complimentary about safeguarding support by the LSCB for schools.

 

Support to those reporting historic abuse was the responsibility of the Police, who were able to signpost individuals to services.  Reassurance was required for current parents and pupils in schools.  There was a legal requirement to encourage whistle blowing and procedures were explained to staff in inductions.   There had also been moves to make to a legal duty for staff to whistle blow.

 

In terms of sports clubs, safeguarding provision depended on a number of things.  If an activity was on schools premises and organised by schools, the same procedures and protection applied as within school.  If schools were letting their facilities, very similar provision applied and could be built into the contract.  For sports clubs outside of school, there was a website that provided guidance to parents.  Sports clubs had access to LSCB training.  However, parents needed to exercise a degree of care and request assurance that coaches were DBS checked and that there were safeguarding procedures.  It was nevertheless important that parts kept concerns in proportion and not unnecessarily restrict the activities of children and young people. 

 

In answer to a question, he stated that young women had been involved in shaping policy and practice in respect of CSE and missing children through focus  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.